Argument写作中逻辑谬误的类型及逻辑说理中的论据

ben-successUID: 8531

GRE Argument写作中逻辑谬误的类型及逻辑说理中的论据
——综合广州新东方庄子、北大魏震和哈工大Chicago版本

2004.2.25日初稿   2004-3-13修订


庄子：
1. 假性因果－Post Hoc (Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc, False Cause, Questionable Cause, Confusing Coincidental Relationships With Causes)

A Post Hoc is a fallacy with the following form:
A occurs before B.
Therefore A is the cause of B.

2. Cum hoc ergo propter hoc (Confusing Cause and Effect)

Confusing Cause and Effect is a fallacy that has the following general form:
A and B regularly occur together.
Therefore A is the cause of B.

辨析：
In the case of a Post Hoc fallacy (http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/post-hoc.html), the error is that a person is accepting that A is the cause of B simply because A occurs before B. In the case of the Fallacy of Ignoring a Common Cause
(http://www.nizkor.org/features/f ... a-common-cause.html) A is taken to be the cause of B when there is, in fact, a third factor that is the cause of both A and B.

3. 错误类比－Weak Analogy (False Analogy / Faulty Analogy / Questionable Analogy)

Form:
A is like B.
B has property P.
Therefore, A has property P.
(Where the analogy between A and B is weak.)

值得参考的网站：www.fallacyfiles.org

4. 调查研究中样本无代表性，非随机样本，偏性样本－Unrepresentative Sample (Biased Sample)

This is a fallacy affecting statistical inferences, which are arguments of the following form:
N% of sample S has characteristic C. Therefore, N% of population P has characteristic C.
(Where sample S is a subset of set P, the population.)

5. 草率结论－Hasty Generalization

This is the fallacy of generalizing about a population based upon a sample that is too small to be representative. If the population is heterogeneous, then the sample needs to be large enough to represent the population's variability. With a completely homogeneous population, a sample of one is sufficiently large, so it is impossible to put an absolute lower limit on sample size. Rather, sample size depends directly upon the variability of the population: the more heterogeneous a population, the larger the sample required. For instance, people tend to be quite variable in their political opinions, so that public opinion polls need fairly large samples to be accurate.

6. Affirming a Disjunct (选言枝) (Fallacy of Propositional Logic, black or white, either... or... , false dichotomy)

Form:
p or q.
p.
Therefore, not-q.

7. 分歧－Bifurcation (false dilemma)


魏震：
Argument逻辑错误分类
(Chicago的说明：[重要] 逻辑错误分析分类及相关例子（外版）。老外的逻辑推论错误；比较新东方老师的七大逻辑错误有所增加，也有没有收录的。参照两份逻辑错误就基本全了。)

1. Loose generalizations

Drawing conclusions about groups of people on the basis of stereotypes (陈词滥调).
Example: French people are more romantic.

2. Hasty generalizations －草率结论

Arriving at a conclusion without enough evidence.
Example: Asian-American students are better in math.

3. Circular Reasoning

Restating in different words what has already been stated.
Example: Dieting is hard because it requires consuming fewer calories. ？

4. Single cause-effect －假性因果

Claiming that only one event caused another when there may be no real connection.
Example: When I sat down at the computer it stopped working, so I must have done something wrong.

5. Slippery Slope ？

Assumes a chain of cause-effect relationships with very suspect connections.
Example: Because I failed my exam, my parents were mad, I lost my wallet, my car wouldn't start, and I got fired.

6. Non Sequitur －<拉>[逻]不合逻辑的推论，不根据前提推导的推论

The first part of the idea does not relate to the other.
Example: I did well in school because I always wore nice clothes.

7. Either/Or －Affirming a Disjunct (选言枝) (Fallacy of Propositional Logic)

Suggesting only two alternatives when the issue may be much more complex.
Example: America--love it or leave it!

8. False Authority －迷信权威，偶像崇拜

Draws attention away from the evidence and leans on the popularity of someone who may have little knowledge of the issue or product.
Example: Kathie Lee Gifford, a popular TV celebrity, says that cruises are wonderful, so they must be.

9. Ad Hominem －从个人偏好出发，非逻辑或理性的

Attacking the person instead of the ideas. －个人人身攻击
Example: Don't vote for Jerry Brown; he's a left-wing fanatic, a throwback to the 60s who meditates and eats health foods.

10. Bandwagon Thinking －流行思想，时髦想法

Claiming that most people agree so it must be right.
Example: I wouldn't have cheated on my income taxes, but everyone else does, so why shouldn't I? ？

11. Stacking the deck －暗中布局，作弊

Giving a slanted view of the issue by focusing only on one side. －只关注一面，而给出一个歪曲的观点
Example: I deserve to get an A in the class because I like the teacher, work hard, and attend class.

12. Appeal to Emotion －以情欺人

Exploiting the audience's feeling in order to get them on your side.
Example: I believe I deserve a scholarship because I am an orphan who grew up in a dysfunctional foster family.

13. Ignoring the question －忽略问题(的症结所在)

Changing the topic before it is really considered －偷换概念(命题)
Example: The criminal won't say where he was on the night of the crime, but he does remember being teased relentlessly as a child.

14. Trivial objections －斤斤计较

Can be similar to ad hominem in that it focuses on things unimportant to the issue at hand.
Example: I think Ross Perot would make a terrible president. His ears are huge.


Chicago:
补充：逻辑说理中的论据
可以看出个人经历也是一个有力的论证，大家可以尝试使用，当然不要太极端或者离奇，带有政治色彩。。嘿嘿。

Using Sources to Persuade
Depending on the type of paper and specific requirements, you may use any of the following types of support.

Personal Experience
Closely related, brief personal examples do help make your point by making the writing more specific, interesting, and believable, but used alone they are usually not enough to convince a reader.

Others' Experiences
Adding the experiences others have had which you have selected from books, magazines, speeches, or TV can help make your generalizations more concrete.

Personal Extended Examples
Instead of using several brief personal examples, you might choose to use one longer, but more powerful personal example to help illustrate your point.

Others' Extended Examples
Extended example from other's experience can be found in newspapers, magazines, books, or newscasts and enable the reader to more fully understand the issue involved by helping the reader relate to the person's experience.

Facts and Statistics
Sometimes your argument requires more objective support than just your experience or the experience of others to really convince the reader. Statistics are one of the most credible sources because they draw on large numbers of people's experiences instead of just one person's experience. They need to be chosen from reputable sources. Examine and use them carefully because they can sometimes be misinterpreted.

Expert Opinion
Another very convincing type of support is expert testimony. Be sure he/she is a well respected expert in the field. Paraphrase or quote ideas that reinforce your argument and be very careful to give proper credit to that source not only for quotes, but also for original ideas (not common knowledge such as might be found in an encyclopedia).

Combinations of Support
Probably the most common and most effective way of supporting your ideas is by using a combination of these types of support. A short example you read about in the newspaper, along with a startling statistic or two, and a quote from an authority helps to build a solid case in the reader's mind.

__________________
The best of our way to predict future is to invent it.-------------------Xfiles


以上内容的前半部分曾于满分网发，今补充后续发于gter。

feier521UID: 109747

谢谢楼主！
精之！

blueqiaoUID: 111634

谢谢！

HightopUID: 158187

很受教益!不愧是高人!希望能多看到这样的帖子!Looking forward more things like this !

imongUID: 140258

哈工大chicago的话难不成是chicagochen？

ben-successUID: 8531

最初由 imong 发布
[B]哈工大chicago的话难不成是chicagochen？ [/B]

哈哈，偶不清楚啦。

就是那个在飞跃上提供“献给精灵的GRE资料”下载的啰。

abigileUID: 153788

起初他们追杀共产主义者，我不是共产主义者，我不说话；
接着他们追杀犹太人，我不是犹太人，我不说话；
后来他们追杀工会会员，我不是工会会员，我不说话；
此后他们追杀天主教徒，我不是天主教徒，我不说话；
最后，他们奔我而来，再也没有人站起来为我说话了。

－－－美国波士顿犹太人大屠杀纪念碑 Martin Niemoller (德国新教牧师)

————————————————————————
这样，我就终于知道他们究竟是谁，为什么可以行使屠杀的权利了。