Are There Any Fallacies in the Reasoning?著眼于論據(jù)
今天的章節(jié)學會問：論證中的理由是否有謬誤？
The objective of critical reading and listening is to judge the acceptability or worth of conclusions.
批判性閱讀和傾聽的目標是判斷某個論點的接受度或觀點的價值势就。
Our task now is separate the fool’s gold from the genuine gold.
結(jié)論是否被接受或者結(jié)論是否有價值取決于支撐結(jié)論的論據(jù)(理由)底哥，論據(jù)有真有假，我們的任務(wù)是去偽存真谬擦。哪些是確鑿的論據(jù)切距，哪些是謬誤。認真嚴肅對待夯實有利的論據(jù)惨远，剝離有誤導(dǎo)性的論據(jù)——fallacies, 謬誤谜悟。
什么是謬誤话肖？
謬誤是推論中的花招，作者利用這寫具有欺騙性的花招來說服你接受他的結(jié)論葡幸。
這章的任務(wù)學會識別謬誤最筒，可以避免我們掉入別人的圈套。
謬誤多種多樣蔚叨，有三種常見的謬誤：
1.基于錯誤假設(shè)的論據(jù)
2.與結(jié)論不相關(guān)的論據(jù)
3.基于結(jié)論正確的論據(jù)
當你發(fā)現(xiàn)一個謬誤論據(jù)時床蜘，你就找到了一個駁斥論證的合理依據(jù)。但是蔑水，謹記對于建設(shè)性的批判思維邢锯，你要關(guān)注那些沒有謬誤的論據(jù)。在口頭交流中發(fā)現(xiàn)謬誤時搀别，如果你希望繼續(xù)交流丹擎，最好的方法是讓對方提供更有力的論據(jù)。
Words & Phrases (每日五詞）
1. unduly
[ADV 副詞] 過分地歇父；過度地蒂培；不適當?shù)兀徊槐匾匕裆唬籌f you say that something does not happen or is not done unduly, you mean that it does not happen or is not done to an excessive or unnecessary extent.
2. tax and spend liberal
共和黨送給民主黨的外號护戳，意思是說，自由派當選執(zhí)政后单刁，他們的政策就是增加對那些辛勤工作的公民的稅收灸异，然后把這些錢去救濟游手好閑的人，使政府更能夠控制人們的生活羔飞。
3. strive
make great efforts to achieve or obtain something
努力, 奮斗, 力求：令人費解（或毫無意義）的話（或文字）; 胡言亂語：
4.red herring
something, especially a clue, which is or is intended to be misleading or distracting
轉(zhuǎn)移注意力之物（尤指線索）
5. sleight of hand
Sleight of hand is the deceiving of someone in a skilful way.
Summary of chapter 7
In this chapter, the author tells us that now we are ready to make our central focus on evaluation. After finding the issue and the conclusion, the reasons, key ambiguous terms and phrase and assumptions in the previous chapters, our task in this chapter is to make judgements more directly and explicitly about the worth or the quality of the reasoning.
Asking the critical question: Are there any fallacies in the reasoning?
What is fallacy?
A fallacy is a reasoning “trick” that an author might use while trying to persuade you to accept a conclusion.
Three common tricks:
1. providing reasoning that requires erroneous or incorrect assumptions, thus making it irrelevant to the conclusion;
2. distracting us by making information seem relevant to the conclusion when it is not;
3. providing support for the conclusion that depends on the conclusion's already being true.
Listed Reasoning Fallacies
- Ad Hominem: ?An attack on the person, rather than directly ?addressing the person's reasons.
- Slippery Slope: Making the assumption that a proposed step will set off an uncontrollable chain of undesirable events, when procedures exist to prevent such a chain of events.
Searching for Perfect Solution: Falsely assuming that because part of a problem remains after a solution is tried, the solution should not be adopted.
-Appeal to Popularity (Ad Populum): An attempt to justify a claim by appealing to sentiments that large groups of people have in common; falsely assumes that anything favored by a large group is desirable.
- Appeal to Questionable Authority: Supporting a conclusion by citing an authority who lacks special expertise on the issue at hand.
- Appeals to Emotions: The use of emotionally charged language to distract readers and listeners from relevant reasons and evidence. Common emotions appealed to are fear, hope, patriotism, pity, and sympathy.
- Straw Person: Distorting our opponent's point of view so that it is easy to attack; thus we attack a point of view that does not truly exist.
-Either-Or (or False Dilemma): Assuming only two alternatives when there are more than two.
-Explaining by Naming: Falsely assuming that because you have provided a name for some event or behavior, you have also adequately explained the event.
- The Planning Fallacy: The tendency for people or organizations to underestimate how long they will need to complete a task, despite numerous prior experiences of having underestimated how long something would take to finish.
- Glittering Generality: The use of vague, emotionally appealing virtue words that dispose us to approve something without closely examining the reasons.
-Red Herring: An irrelevant topic is presented to divert attention from the original issue and help to win an argument by shifting attention away from the argument and to another issue. The fallacy sequence in this instance is as follows: ?(a) Topic A is being discussed; (b) Topic B is introduced as though it is relevant to ?topic A, but it is not; and (c) Topic A is abandoned.
- Begging the Question: An argument in which the conclusion is assumed in the reasoning.
Finding fallacies could help us judge the reasoning, but in the spirit of constructive critical thinking, we should consider any reasons that are not fallacies.
感悟
我們常說表達觀點要有理有據(jù)肺樟，即要有理由、有根據(jù)逻淌。 有理有據(jù)說起來容易么伯，做起來并不容易。因為我們在表達觀點的時候卡儒，并沒有意識到自己提出的所謂的理由是站不住腳的田柔；甚至有時候還會被被謬誤的論據(jù)所蠱惑。
公眾意見骨望，網(wǎng)絡(luò)大V硬爆，大神說的就可以當做你的論據(jù)嗎？我們要時刻保持警惕擎鸠，一旦推論中出現(xiàn)謬誤缀磕，比如錯誤的假設(shè)，轉(zhuǎn)移觀點，偷換概念等等問題袜蚕，我們就要對其所持的觀點質(zhì)疑糟把。
