常见逻辑谬误(中英对照Fallacy)

合集下载

生活里的逻辑谬误英语作文

生活里的逻辑谬误英语作文【中英文实用版】English Essay:Title: Logical Fallacies in Everyday LifeLogic plays a crucial role in our daily lives, guiding our decisions and shaping our understanding of the world.However, we often encounter logical fallacies that can cloud our judgment and mislead our reasoning.These fallacies can be found in various aspects of life, from casual conversations to political debates.This essay aims to explore some common logical fallacies that we encounter in our daily lives.One prevalent logical fallacy is the ad hominem attack, where instead of addressing the argument itself, an individual attacks the person making the argument.For example, if someone suggests implementing stricter environmental regulations, a person using an ad hominem fallacy might respond by mocking their choice of transportation, thereby avoiding the actual issue at hand.Another common fallacy is the straw man argument, where an individual misrepresents someone"s position to make it easier to attack.This can be seen in political campaigns when candidates distort their opponents" views to gain an advantage.By setting up a weaker version of the opponent"s argument, they can easily dismantle it, creating a false sense of victory.The bandwagon fallacy is often observed when people argue that something must be true or good simply because many others believe in it.This can be seen in trends and fads, where individuals feel compelled to conform without critically evaluating the validity of the trend.In addition, the appeal to authority fallacy occurs when someone"s argument is based solely on the authority or status of the person presenting it, rather than on the merits of the argument itself.For example, if a celebrity endorses a product, some people may automatically assume it is of high quality without conducting further research.Closely related is the appeal to tradition fallacy, where an argument is deemed correct solely because it has been done a certain way for a long time.This can hinder progress and innovation, as people may be reluctant to challenge long-standing practices, even if they are outdated or inefficient.Lastly, the slippery slope fallacy involves predicting extreme consequences from a relatively minor action, without providing sufficient evidence for the causal chain.This can lead to unnecessary fear and resistance to change.In conclusion, logical fallacies are pervasive in our daily lives, and it is essential to recognize and challenge them to maintain clear and rational thinking.By being aware of these fallacies, we can engage in more meaningful discussions and make more informed decisions.中文作文：标题：生活中的逻辑谬误逻辑在我们的日常生活中起着至关重要的作用，它指导我们的决策，塑造我们对世界的理解。

二十四谬误中英对照

第一部分考试范围内本次考试考第一部分列举的前15个。

后面第二部分列举的仅供以后学习参考。

(一)了解基本逻辑，避免常见错误要了解基本逻辑错误一定不能错过一篇英文小品文Love Is A Fallacy(作者Max Shulman)，这里仅列举出十种最常见的逻辑错误。

1.草率前提(Dicto Simpliciter)例如：Women are on average not as strong as men and less able to perform well politically. Therefore, women can't pull their weight in government work.点评：虽然女性确实在政界担任较少工作，但这不意味着女性群体中所有的人都是这样。

2.过度概化(Hasty Generalization)例如：McDonald's and KFC offer foods with little nutrition, and thus we cannot expect any fast food restaurant to provide us with nutritious foods.点评：两个个例不足以推出一个真理。

3.因果颠倒(Post Hoc)例如：Most young criminals watch violent movies before they commit their crimes; obviously, violent movies lead to juvenile delinquency.点评：甲事情发生在乙事情之前，这并不代表着先发生的甲事情就是后发生的乙事情的原因。

4.矛盾前提(Contradictory Premises)例如：If God can do everything, can he make a stone so heavy that he can't carry?点评：前提条件中就有相互矛盾的地方，结论当然是错误的。

二十四谬误中英对照

第一部分考试范围内本次考试考第一部分列举的前15个。

后面第二部分列举的仅供以后学习参考。

(一)了解基本逻辑，避免常见错误要了解基本逻辑错误一定不能错过一篇英文小品文Love Is A Fallacy(作者Max Shulman)，这里仅列举出十种最常见的逻辑错误。

【8A版】常见逻辑谬误(中英对照Fallacy)

分散注意力的谬误（FallaciesofDistraction）两难推理（FalseDilemma）错谬：为多于一个答案的问题提供不足（通常两个）的选择，即是隐藏了一些选择，最典型的表现是非黑即白观点。

例子：萨达姆是邪恶的，所以美军是正义之师。

解释：除正邪之争外，还有邪邪之争及许多难分正邪的纷争，所以不能单以萨达姆邪恶便认定美军正义。

诉诸无知（FromIgnorance）错谬：因为不能否定，所以必然肯定，反之亦然。

例子：没有人能证明鬼不存在，那么鬼肯定存在。

解释：总有些事是既不能否定，亦不能肯定的。

除了肯定和否定，我们还可以存疑吧！滑坡谬误（SlipperySlope）错谬：不合理使用连串因果关系。

例子：迟到的学生要判死刑。

因为迟到是不用功的表现；将来工作也不勤力；不勤力导致公司损失；公司损失就会倒闭；公司倒闭会使人失业；失业造成家庭问题；家庭问题导致自杀率上升，为了防止自杀率上升，我们应判迟到的学生死刑。

解释：滑坡谬误中假定了连串“可能性”为“必然性”。

比方说，迟到是否“必然”是不用功的表现？将来工作又是否“必然”不勤力？答案可想而知。

例子虽然夸张，但其实许多时候大家亦会犯相同错误而不自知。

复合问题（CompleGQuestion）错谬：一条问题内包含两个无关的重点。

例子：你还有没有干那非法勾当？（你有干非法勾当吗？是否还有继续？）解释：简单的一句提问，其实隐藏了两个问题。

你给予其中一条问题的答案，并不一定和另外一条的一样。

例如你有干非法勾当，但未必等于你还有继续。

诉诸其他支持（AppealstoMotivesinPlaceofSupport）诉诸势力（AppealtoForce）错谬：以势力服人。

例子：若你不想被解雇，你必须认同公司的制度。

解释：这是以工作机会强迫员工认同制度，员工不是依据制度好坏来决定认同与否。

诉诸怜悯（AppealtoPity）错谬：以别人的同情心服人。

例子：希望你接受我这个多月来天天通宵撰写的建议书。

英语作文逻辑谬误分析

英语作文逻辑谬误分析In analyzing logical fallacies in English essays, it's crucial to understand the common types of errors that can occur. Logical fallacies are flaws in reasoning that weaken the overall argument. Here, I'll discuss several prevalent fallacies and provide examples to illustrate each one.1. Ad Hominem: This fallacy involves attacking the person making the argument rather than addressing the argument itself.Example: "John's proposal for healthcare reformshouldn't be taken seriously because he's a known criminal."2. Straw Man: This occurs when someone misrepresents their opponent's argument to make it easier to attack.Example: "Opponents of stricter gun control laws want to arm everyone, turning our streets into warzones."3. Appeal to Authority: This involves using anauthority figure's opinion as evidence in an argument when the authority is not truly an expert on the subject.Example: "Dr. Smith, a renowned physicist, believes in the existence of ghosts, so they must be real."4. False Dichotomy: This occurs when only two options are presented as if they are the only possibilities when,in fact, there are more.Example: "Either we cut social programs entirely, or our country will go bankrupt."5. Circular Reasoning: This happens when the conclusion is simply restated in different terms as evidence to support the conclusion.Example: "The Bible is true because it is the word of God, and we know this because the Bible says so."6. Appeal to Emotion: This involves manipulating emotions to distract from the facts of the argument.Example: "Supporting this environmental policy is the only compassionate choice for caring individuals."7. Hasty Generalization: This occurs when a conclusionis drawn from insufficient evidence.Example: "I met one rude person from France, so all French people must be rude."8. Appeal to Ignorance: This fallacy asserts that a proposition is true because it has not been proven false,or vice versa.Example: "Aliens must exist because no one has proven they don't."9. Begging the Question: This happens when the conclusion of an argument is assumed in one of the premises.Example: "The death penalty is wrong because it is morally unacceptable to execute people."10. Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc: This fallacy assertsthat because one event follows another, the first event must have caused the second.Example: "Every time I wear my lucky socks, my team wins. Therefore, my lucky socks must be the reason for our victories."In English essays, it's important to identify and avoid these logical fallacies to strengthen the argument's credibility and persuasiveness. By recognizing these errors in reasoning, writers can construct more robust and compelling arguments.。

logicalfallacy逻辑错误[终稿]

logical fallacy 逻辑错误[终稿](一)了解基本逻辑，避免常见错误要了解基本逻辑错误一定不能错过一篇英文小品文Love Is A Fallacy(作者MaxShulman)，这里仅列举出十种最常见的逻辑错误。

1.草率前提 (Dicto Simpliciter)例如:Women are on average not as strong as men and less able to perform well politically. Therefore, women can't pull their weight in government work.点评:虽然女性确实在政界担任较少工作，但这不意味着女性群体中所有的人都是这样。

2.过度概化 (Hasty Generalization)例如:McDonald's and KFC offer foods with little nutrition, and thus we cannot expect any fast food restaurant to provide us with nutritious foods.点评:两个个例不足以推出一个真理。

3.因果颠倒 (Post Hoc)例如:Most young criminals watch violent movies before they commit their crimes; obviously, violent movies lead to juvenile delinquency.点评:甲事情发生在乙事情之前，这并不代表着先发生的甲事情就是后发生的乙事情的原因。

4.矛盾前提 (Contradictory Premises)例如:If God can do everything, can he make a stone so heavy that he can't carry?点评:前提条件中就有相互矛盾的地方，结论当然是错误的。

辩论中的逻辑谬误识别与反驳

辩论中的逻辑谬误识别与反驳辩论是一种通过对立观点的交锋来寻求真理的方式。

在辩论过程中，逻辑谬误是常见的问题，它们会导致辩论的失真和无效。

因此，识别和反驳逻辑谬误是辩论者必备的技能。

本文将介绍一些常见的逻辑谬误，并提供相应的反驳方法。

一、识别逻辑谬误1. 无中生有谬误（Ad Hoc Fallacy）无中生有谬误是指在辩论中，一个人无视事实和证据，凭空捏造一个观点或论据。

这种谬误常常用于弥补自己观点的不足或缺陷。

2. 诉诸个人攻击谬误（Ad Hominem Fallacy）诉诸个人攻击谬误是指在辩论中，一个人无视对方的观点和论据，而是将注意力转移到对方的个人品质、背景或外貌等方面进行攻击。

这种谬误是一种无效的辩论策略，因为它无法对对方的观点进行有效的反驳。

3. 诉诸权威谬误（Appeal to Authority Fallacy）诉诸权威谬误是指在辩论中，一个人以权威人士的观点作为自己观点的支持，而无视其他证据和逻辑推理。

这种谬误忽视了科学方法和客观证据的重要性，仅仅依赖于权威的观点。

4. 诉诸情感谬误（Appeal to Emotion Fallacy）诉诸情感谬误是指在辩论中，一个人试图通过激发对方的情感来影响对方的观点。

这种谬误常常使用情感化的语言和夸张的表述，而忽视事实和逻辑推理。

5. 诉诸普遍谬误（Appeal to Popularity Fallacy）诉诸普遍谬误是指在辩论中，一个人试图通过引用大多数人的观点来支持自己的观点。

这种谬误忽视了真理不取决于多数人的观点，而是取决于事实和逻辑推理。

二、反驳逻辑谬误1. 反驳无中生有谬误当对方无中生有时，我们可以要求对方提供相关的证据和事实来支持他们的观点。

如果对方无法提供充分的证据，我们可以指出他们的观点是基于主观臆断而非客观事实。

2. 反驳诉诸个人攻击谬误当对方诉诸个人攻击时，我们可以保持冷静，不受攻击的情绪影响。

我们应该专注于对方的观点和论据，并提出合理的反驳。

英语作文逻辑谬误例子

英语作文逻辑谬误例子Logical fallacies are common pitfalls in English writing, often leading to flawed arguments or misleading conclusions. Here are several examples of logical fallacies that you might encounter in English composition:1. Ad Hominem: This fallacy involves attacking the person making the argument rather than addressing the argument itself. For example:"You can't trust Bob's opinion on climate change because he's not a scientist."2. Straw Man: This occurs when someone misrepresents their opponent's argument to make it easier to attack. For instance:"Opponents of the new healthcare policy want to see people suffer without any medical care."3. Appeal to Authority: Relying on the opinion of an authority figure rather than presenting evidence or reasoned arguments. For example:"Dr. Smith says that eating three meals a day is unhealthy, so it must be true."4. False Dilemma: Presenting only two options when there are actually more available. For instance:"Either we ban all cars or we destroy the environment."5. Circular Reasoning: When the conclusion of an argument is essentially the same as one of its premises, making the argument invalid. For example:"The Bible is true because it says so, and it's the word of God."6. Appeal to Ignorance: Asserting that a claim is true simply because it hasn't been proven false, or vice versa.For example:"There's no evidence that aliens don't exist, sothey must exist."7. Hasty Generalization: Drawing a conclusion based on insufficient or biased evidence. For instance:"I met two rude French people, so all French people must be rude."8. Red Herring: Introducing irrelevant information to divert attention from the topic at hand. For example:"Yes, I forgot to do my homework, but let's talk about how hard the assignment was instead."9. Appeal to Emotion: Using emotions such as fear, pity, or joy to manipulate an audience rather than presentingvalid arguments. For instance:"If we don't pass this law, think of all thechildren who will suffer!"10. Begging the Question: Assuming the truth of the conclusion in the premise. For example:"The death penalty is wrong because it is immoral to take a life."These are just a few examples of logical fallacies that writers should be aware of when crafting arguments or essays in English. Recognizing and avoiding these fallacies can help strengthen the logic and persuasiveness of your writing.。

谬误的七种分类

谬误的七种分类一、绝对谬误（Absolute Fallacy）绝对谬误指的是假设完全不合乎逻辑和客观事实的谬误，此类谬误是以逻辑谬论为基础和框架来进行讨论的，因此被视为无法得出结论的误区。

例如：'所有的善行都会被上帝奖赏，因此人们可以行恶而不怕受罚'。

这种绝对谬论假定尽管行恶也不会受到惩罚，这在逻辑上是不可行的。

二、比较谬误（Comparative Fallacy）比较谬误指的是滥用比较来证明某种特定观点的谬论，两个事物之间势必存在差异，因此没有必要去比较两者之间的不同点。

例如：'中国的经济发展比美国的快，所以中国的政府比美国的执政效率高'。

这种谬论忽略了两国不同的历史背景，以及政策、文化等方面的差异。

三、负面谬误（Negative Fallacy）负面谬误指的是没有考虑负面影响而仅仅证明正面影响的谬论。

即用'没有反对'来证明'有赞成'，从而假设'不做，就是做'或'权衡其利弊，依然做'。

例如：'没有发现空气质量受到污染，所以可以假设它是清洁的'。

这种谬论忽略了其他可能释放有害物质的因素，如噪音等，从而无法确定空气的清洁程度。

四、遗漏谬误（Omission Fallacy）遗漏谬误指的是一方仅仅强调自己的观点，忽略另一方观点的谬论。

此类谬误混淆了关于某一问题的全部事实，却仅仅考虑较少的事实，从而假设其他事实不存在或具有不重要性。

例如：'大学不是为了准备投资环境，而仅仅是为了探究知识'。

这种谬论忽略了大学也可以提供大学生以社会资源和专业技能的能力，从而准备他们进入投资环境。

五、范畴谬误（Category Fallacy）范畴谬误指的是妄图把不同的事物或范畴混为一体的谬论，其中一小部分被错误地视为整体的主要特征。

例如：'企业不应受到过多的税收，因为它们和其他组织形态不同'。

十种谬误中英对照

十种谬误中英对照了解基本逻辑，避免常见错误?要了解基本逻辑错误一定不能错过一篇英文小品文LoveIsAFallacy(作者MaxShulman)，这里仅列举出十种最常见的逻辑错误。

?1.草率前提(DictoSimpliciter)?例如：Womenareonaveragenotasstrongasmenandlessabletoperformwellpolitically.Therefore,womencan''tpulltheirweightingovernmentwork.?点评：虽然女性确实在政界担任较少工作，但这不意味着女性群体中所有的人都是这样。

?2.过度概化(HastyGeneralization)?例如：McDonald''sandKFCofferfoodswithlittlenutrition,andthuswecannotexpectanyfastfoodrestauranttoprovideuswithnutritiousfoods.?点评：两个个例不足以推出一个真理。

?3.因果颠倒(PostHoc)?例如：Mostyoungcriminalswatchviolentmoviesbeforetheycommitt heircrimes;obviously,violentmoviesleadtojuveniledelinquency.点评：甲事情发生在乙事情之前，这并不代表着先发生的甲事情就是后发生的乙事情的原因。

?4.矛盾前提(ContradictoryPremises)?例如：IfGodcandoeverything,canhemakeastonesoheavythathecan''tcarry??点评：前提条件中就有相互矛盾的地方，结论当然是错误的。

?5.感性论证(AdMisericordiam)?例如：Thinkofallthepoor,starvingAfricanchildren!Howcouldrichcountriesbesocruelasnottohelpthem??点评：抒情是不能当作论证的。

常见逻辑谬误（Commonfallacy）

常见逻辑谬误（Common fallacy）Common fallacyOrder tyrantIn the current China network, all kinds of controversy never dissipate too wolf. However, a large part of the debate was nonsense, tangled up, speak the same situation, let a person feel very helpless. One of the main reasons for the lack of information and knowledge in the debate is that one of the main reasons is the confusion of logical thinking, which leads to the emergence of various logical fallacies and sophistry. In the article, the author wanted to take stock of various common logical fallacies.Logic fallacy is divided into formal logic, false logic and non formal logic fallacy.Formal logic fallacy refers to the logical fallacy resulting from reasoning, deduction and argument without formal logic reasoning rules:Negative antecedent fallacy: "if A is then B; non A; so non B"."Example: if it is a bird, then it will die; people are not birds; therefore, people will not die."This is the misuse of categorical syllogism. The correct form of categorical syllogism should be: "if A is then B; A; so B?"."Sure post fallacy: "if A is then B; B; so A?";"Example: if it is fried dough sticks, then it is delicious; bread is delicious; therefore, bread is a fried bread stick."This is also the misuse of categorical syllogism.False dilemma reasoning: "A" or "B" or "C"; non A; so B."This is a misuse of disjunctive syllogism. Disjunctive syllogism is of the form: "A or B; A; B." The concatenation is in this form: "P1" or "P2" or "P3"...... Or Pn; non P2 and non P3...... And not Pn; so P1." In Holmes's words, "when all the other possibilities are eliminated and there is one left, it is the truth, no matter how unlikely it may seem."."The fallacy is called "false dilemma reasoning" because it is often expressed in such a form: "support China or support the United States; you do not support China; so you support the United States."." The formulation of sophist deliberately "neutral" option to hide, cause the illusion of disjunctive syllogism. It is worth noting that some people tend to classify false dilemma into informal logic fallacy.There are many forms of logic fallacy, most of which have not yet been formally named, and are not expressed here. The following focuses on informal logic fallacy:Appeal to ignorance: to judge that a thing is right, simply because it has not been proved wrong; or to judge that a thing is wrong, because it is not proved to be right.The logic of many conspiracy theorists, for example, is this: you can't disprove my theory, so my theory is right.For example, some "Chinese medicine powder" logic: science can not falsify the theory of traditional Chinese medicine, so the theory of Chinese medicine is correct. It looks like a beehiveOf course, "Chinese medicine powder" will attack people who do not accept Chinese medicine. They are resorting to ignorance: "at present, the theory of traditional Chinese medicine can not be scientifically proved, but it does not mean that Chinese medicine is wrong."." In fact, this is not to resort to ignorance, because people in this life threatening medical things, people not only do not accept the falsification of the theory, also do not accept unproven and not falsifiable theory, and only accept the proven theory.Circular reasoning. Also called "expected reasons" and "begging for magic"". This is the logical fallacy of using hypotheses to prove hypotheses.Typical form: "if P, then Q, if Q, then R, if R is P then; assume P; so P."."Example: "XX" says that God exists; because XX is the word of God, XX must not be wrong; therefore, God exists."Of course, when using the circle argument, the quibble will go around a big circle, making it seem impossible.When it comes to circular reasoning, by the way, the loopdefinition. A real example is used (it seems nineteenth Century) circles on the kilogram is defined as "from the standard air quality," a liter of water, and the definition of the standard atmospheric pressure is 101325 Pa, and the definition of the unit of pressure is the "Newton Pa (N/ per square metre" (m^2 the definition of the unit)), Newton of force is "so that the quality of a kilogram to produce a square meters per second acceleration force" (kg - m/ (s^2)), thus resulting in a circular definition. Later, in order to avoid circular definitions, kilograms were used to define the quality of an international kilogram of raw materials.Landslide fallacy. A logical fallacy that transforms "possibility" into "necessity".Those who use the fallacy of landslide often use a long string of reasoning linked together. Many of these reasoning are probabilistic (even small to negligible probabilities), whereas the quibble is deliberately stated as inevitability,Thus, one can eventually produce "almost no connection" results from one thing.Example: "if you buy the Japanese goods, the Japanese company will be profitable; if the Japanese corporate earnings, then development of Japanese companies to expand; if Japanese companies grow, the national strength of Japan will become the first in the world; if the power of Japan to become the world's first, then Japan will Chinese aggression. So if you buy Japanese goods, you're helping Japan invade china."All kinds of "exaggeration" is often used in landslide fallacy.Overgeneralization。

常见逻辑谬误（中英对照Fallacy）

分散注意力的谬误‎（Fallaci‎e s of Di‎s tractio‎n）两难推理‎（False D‎i lemma）∙‎错谬：为多于一个‎答案的问题提供不‎足（通常两个）的‎选择，即是隐藏了‎一些选择，最典型‎的表现是非黑即白‎观点。

∙例子：‎萨达姆是邪恶的，‎所以美军是正义之‎师。

∙解释：除‎正邪之争外，还有‎邪邪之争及许多难‎分正邪的纷争，所‎以不能单以萨达姆‎邪恶便认定美军正‎义。

诉诸无‎知（From I‎g norance‎）∙错谬：因为不‎能否定，所以必然‎肯定，反之亦然。

‎∙例子：没有人‎能证明鬼不存在，‎那么鬼肯定存在。

‎∙解释：总有些‎事是既不能否定，‎亦不能肯定的。

除‎了肯定和否定，我‎们还可以存疑吧！‎滑坡谬误（‎S lippery‎Slope）∙‎错谬：不合理使用‎连串因果关系。

‎∙例子：迟到的学‎生要判死刑。

因为‎迟到是不用功的表‎现；将来工作也不‎勤力；不勤力导致‎公司损失；公司损‎失就会倒闭；公司‎倒闭会使人失业；‎失业造成家庭问题‎；家庭问题导致自‎杀率上升，为了防‎止自杀率上升，我‎们应判迟到的学生‎死刑。

∙解释：‎滑坡谬误中假定了‎连串“可能性”为‎“必然性”。

比方‎说，迟到是否“必‎然”是不用功的表‎现？将来工作又是‎否“必然”不勤力‎？答案可想而知。

‎例子虽然夸张，但‎其实许多时候大家‎亦会犯相同错误而‎不自知。

复‎合问题（Comp‎l ex Ques‎t ion）∙错谬‎：一条问题内包含‎两个无关的重点。

‎∙例子：你还有‎没有干那非法勾当‎？（你有干非法勾‎当吗？是否还有继‎续？）∙解释：‎简单的一句提问，‎其实隐藏了两个问‎题。

你给予其中一‎条问题的答案，并‎不一定和另外一条‎的一样。

例如你有‎干非法勾当，但未‎必等于你还有继续‎。

‎诉诸其‎他支持（Appe‎a ls to M‎o tiv es i‎n Place ‎o f Suppo‎r t）诉诸势‎力（Appeal‎to Forc‎e）∙错谬：以势‎力服人。

八大逻辑谬误事例英语作文

八大逻辑谬误事例英语作文英文回答：Logic fallacies are errors in reasoning that can weaken an argument or make it invalid. There are eight major types of logical fallacies that people often encounter in everyday conversations, debates, and written texts. Let me provide you with some examples to illustrate each of these fallacies.1. Ad Hominem: This fallacy occurs when someone attacks the person making the argument instead of addressing the argument itself. For example, if someone says, "You can't trust what she says because she's a terrible person," they are committing an ad hominem fallacy.2. Appeal to Authority: This fallacy happens when someone relies on the opinion of an authority figure instead of providing evidence or reasons to support their argument. For instance, saying, "My doctor said that thisproduct is the best, so it must be true," is an appeal to authority fallacy.3. False Dilemma: This fallacy presents only twooptions when there are actually more available. For example, saying, "You're either with us or against us," is a false dilemma fallacy because there may be other options or perspectives to consider.4. Slippery Slope: This fallacy suggests that one thing will lead to another, usually with extreme consequences.For instance, arguing that if we allow same-sex marriage,it will lead to people marrying animals is a slippery slope fallacy.5. Straw Man: This fallacy misrepresents or exaggerates an opponent's argument to make it easier to attack. For example, if someone says, "Those who support gun control want to take away all our rights," they are creating astraw man argument.6. Circular Reasoning: This fallacy occurs when theconclusion is simply restating the premise in a slightly different way. For instance, saying, "I know the book is true because it says so in the book," is an example of circular reasoning.7. Hasty Generalization: This fallacy involves making a broad conclusion based on insufficient evidence. For example, if someone says, "All politicians are corrupt because I saw one taking a bribe," they are making a hasty generalization.8. Appeal to Emotion: This fallacy manipulates emotions to win an argument instead of relying on logic or evidence. For instance, using a sad story to convince someone to donate money without providing facts or data is an appeal to emotion fallacy.Now, let me provide you with some examples in Chinese to further illustrate these logical fallacies.中文回答：逻辑谬误是在推理过程中出现的错误，可能会削弱一个论点或使其无效。

高英logicfallacy八大逻辑谬误

No!
The cause has no connection with the result.
原因和结果没有必然联系
Contradictory premises 矛盾前提
He decided to give up all his decisions.
No!
When the premises of an argument contradict
No!
Making an analogy between different things.
Hypothesis contrary to fact
与事实相反的假设
If I had studied harder, I would definitely have passed that test .
No!
Exercise is good，so everybody should exercise.
It means an argument based on an unqualified generalization.
即将普遍规则运用于有特殊情况发生的个别情形之中。
Hasty generalization 草率结论
It applies a special case to general rule.
由个别情形来推断普遍规则.
Post hoc 牵强附会
McDonald's and KFC offer foods with little nutrition, and thus we cannot expect any fast food restaurant to provide us with nutritious foods.
Eight Types of Fallacy

逻辑谬误24种英语例子

逻辑谬误24种英语例子逻辑谬误是一种常见的错误推理，它们常常出现在我们的日常生活中。

这些错误推理会导致我们做出错误的判断，从而影响我们的决策和行为。

在本文中，我们将介绍逻辑谬误的24种类型，并提供英语例子来帮助读者更好地理解这些谬误。

1. Ad Hominem Fallacy（人身攻击谬误）这种谬误是通过攻击对手的人格或品德来质疑他们的观点的有效性。

例如：'你不能相信他的观点，因为他是一个酗酒者。

'2. Appeal to Authority Fallacy（权威谬误）这种谬误是基于权威人士的观点而不是事实或逻辑来支持某个观点。

例如：'我的医生说这种药是最好的，所以我会服用它。

'3. Appeal to Ignorance Fallacy（无知谬误）这种谬误是基于缺乏证据来证明某个事情或观点是正确的，或者缺乏证据来证明它是错误的。

例如：'没有人能够证明外星人不存在，所以他们一定存在。

'4. Appeal to Emotion Fallacy（情感谬误）这种谬误是基于情感而不是事实或逻辑来支持某个观点。

例如： '我们必须支持这个计划，因为它会让我们的孩子更加安全。

' 5. Bandwagon Fallacy（跟风谬误）这种谬误是基于大多数人支持某个观点而不是事实或逻辑来支持它。

例如：'大多数人都支持这个政党，所以我会投票给它。

'6. Begging the Question Fallacy（迎合问题谬误）这种谬误是基于假设某个事情是正确的而不是提供证据来证明它是正确的。

例如：'这个计划是正确的，因为我们都同意这个计划是正确的。

'7. False Dichotomy Fallacy（伪二元论谬误）这种谬误是基于错误的二元论，即只有两个选项可供选择。

例如： '你是要支持我们的计划，还是反对我们的计划？'8. Slippery Slope Fallacy（滑坡谬误）这种谬误是基于假设一个事件的发生将导致不可避免的结果。

二十四谬误中英对照

⼆⼗四谬误中英对照第⼀部分考试范围内本次考试考第⼀部分列举的前15个。

后⾯第⼆部分列举的仅供以后学习参考。

(⼀)了解基本逻辑，避免常见错误要了解基本逻辑错误⼀定不能错过⼀篇英⽂⼩品⽂Love Is A Fallacy(作者Max Shulman)，这⾥仅列举出⼗种最常见的逻辑错误。

1.草率前提(Dicto Simpliciter)例如：Women are on average not as strong as men and less able to perform well politically. Therefore, women can't pull their weight in government work.点评：虽然⼥性确实在政界担任较少⼯作，但这不意味着⼥性群体中所有的⼈都是这样。

3.因果颠倒(Post Hoc)例如：Most young criminals watch violent movies before they commit their crimes; obviously, violent movies lead to juvenile delinquency.点评：甲事情发⽣在⼄事情之前，这并不代表着先发⽣的甲事情就是后发⽣的⼄事情的原因。

4.⽭盾前提(Contradictory Premises)例如：If God can do everything, can he make a stone so heavy that he can't carry?点评：前提条件中就有相互⽭盾的地⽅，结论当然是错误的。

logical fallacy 逻辑错误

(一)了解基本逻辑，避免常见错误要了解基本逻辑错误一定不能错过一篇英文小品文Love Is A Fallacy(作者Max Shulman)，这里仅列举出十种最常见的逻辑错误。

1.草率前提 (Dicto Simpliciter)例如：Women are on average not as strong as men and less able to perform well politically. Therefore, women can't pull their weight in government work.点评：虽然女性确实在政界担任较少工作，但这不意味着女性群体中所有的人都是这样。

2.过度概化 (Hasty Generalization)例如：McDonald's and KFC offer foods with little nutrition, and thus we cannot expect any fast food restaurant to provide us with nutritious foods.点评：两个个例不足以推出一个真理。

3.因果颠倒 (Post Hoc)例如：Most young criminals watch violent movies before they commit their crimes; obviously, violent movies lead to juvenile delinquency.点评：甲事情发生在乙事情之前，这并不代表着先发生的甲事情就是后发生的乙事情的原因。

4.矛盾前提 (Contradictory Premises)例如：If God can do everything, can he make a stone so heavy that he can't carry?点评：前提条件中就有相互矛盾的地方，结论当然是错误的。

常见逻辑谬误(中英对照Fallacy)

常见逻辑谬误(中英对照Fallacy)分散注意力的谬误（Fallacies of Distraction）两难推理（False Dilemma）•错谬：为多于一个答案的问题提供不足（通常两个）的选择，即是隐藏了一些选择，最典型的表现是非黑即白观点。

•例子：萨达姆是邪恶的，所以美军是正义之师。

•解释：除正邪之争外，还有邪邪之争及许多难分正邪的纷争，所以不能单以萨达姆邪恶便认定美军正义。

诉诸无知（From Ignorance）•错谬：因为不能否定，所以必然肯定，反之亦然。

•例子：没有人能证明鬼不存在，那么鬼肯定存在。

•解释：总有些事是既不能否定，亦不能肯定的。

除了肯定和否定，我们还可以存疑吧！滑坡谬误（Slippery Slope）•错谬：不合理使用连串因果关系。

•例子：迟到的学生要判死刑。

•解释：滑坡谬误中假定了连串“可能性”为“必然性”。

比方说，迟到是否“必然”是不用功的表现？将来工作又是否“必然”不勤力？答案可想而知。

例子虽然夸张，但其实许多时候大家亦会犯相同错误而不自知。

复合问题（Complex Question）•错谬：一条问题内包含两个无关的重点。

•例子：你还有没有干那非法勾当？（你有干非法勾当吗？是否还有继续？）•解释：简单的一句提问，其实隐藏了两个问题。

你给予其中一条问题的答案，并不一定和另外一条的一样。

例如你有干非法勾当，但未必等于你还有继续。

诉诸其他支持（Appeals to Motives in Place of Support）诉诸势力（Appeal to Force）•错谬：以势力服人。

•例子：若你不想被解雇，你必须认同公司的制度。

•解释：这是以工作机会强迫员工认同制度，员工不是依据制度好坏来决定认同与否。

八个逻辑错误

(1). Dicto Simpliciter Fallacy(绝对判断谬误):It occurs when an acceptable exception is ignored or eliminatedFor example:1. The Plane is the fastest tool of transportation. Therefore, every time when we go for a business trip, we should take the plane.2. Tertiary education is important, so everyone in China should study hard for a bachelor degree.(2). Hasty Generalization Fallacy(草率结论谬误)It reaches an inductive generalization based on insufficient evidence.For example:1. Lucy is a prime student. Mary is a prime student. Steve is a prime student, too. Therefore, all the students in this college are prime students.2. I haven’t seen a UFO; Jason hasn’t either; Ms Yan hasn’t probably; so no UFO in the world at all.(3).Post Hoc Fallacy (牵强附会)It is a logical fallacy of the questionable cause that states, "Since that event followed this one, that event must have been caused by this one."For example:1. Don’t sing this song. Each time you sing this song, I get sick.2. That old man is very wealthy, so he must be very healthy.3. Your eyes are really big, so you must have very good eyesight.(4). Contradictory Premises Fallacy (矛盾前提谬误)The conclusion is contradictory to the premiseFor example:1. This is the mightiest sword which is able to shatter any shield, and that is the most indestructible shield which is capable of enduring any stroke.2. If God can do anything, can he make a stone so heavy that he cannot lift it? And If God is all powerful, can he put himself out of existence and come back with twice the power he had before?(5). Ad Misericordiam Fallacy(诉诸同情，文不对题)It is also called an appeal to pity. It is a fallacy in which someone tries to win support for an argument or idea by exploiting the opponent's sympathy or guilt.For example:1. Maybe I am not qualified enough for this job, but think about my poor living conditions, my two twin girls who are now in hospital.2. “ Why are you late for class again?” “ Because I got up late this morning, and unfortunately I fell down from my bike when riding to school.”(6). False Analogy Fallacy(错误类比谬误)It is a fallacy in which an argument is based on misleading, superficial, or implausible comparisons.For example:1. Since we have moon cakes in the Moon Festival, why don’t we have spring cakes in the Spring Festival?2. Before the building of the library, we all studied in the classroom. So I think you should also study in the classroom.(7). Hypothesis Contrary to Fact(与事实相反的假设)For example:1. If TV were not invented, today people would never have such wonderful entertainment by watching TV programme.2. If the paper hadn’t been invented by the talented Chinese, there wouldn’t have been so many books in the world.(8). Poisoning the Well (投毒下井)It involves trying to discredit what a person might later claim by presenting unfavorable information about the person.For example：1. Don't talk to Sam, for he's a scoundrel.2. I suggest that you do not listen to any word from Pro Smith, for he is a real jerk. I think he is some sort of eurocentric fascist."。