fallacy

简明释义

英[ˈfæləsi]美[ˈfæləsi]

n. 谬论，谬见；推理谬误；谬误性

复 数 f a l l a c i e s

英英释义

单词用法

同义词

反义词

例句

1.Practicing neuroscientists have known for years that reverse inference is a fallacy.

专业的神经科学家早就知道反向推理是谬论。

2.It is a fallacy to assume this means 'higher ticket prices or higher taxes' for the 'hapless Asian air traveller' if he travels on JAL.

如果认为这意味着乘坐日航的“倒霉的亚洲旅客”需要承担“更高的机票价格或税收”，那就大错特错了。

3.It is a fallacy to say that the camera never lies.

说照相机绝不骗人，这是谬见。

4.But Boothman also maintains that working a room is a fallacy anyway.

但是布斯曼也认为把人际交往限定在一个房间里面是不太明智的。

5.Value can never be defined in non-evaluative terms, hence the naturalistic fallacy.

价值不可能用非评价性的词来定义，否则就会犯自然主义的错误。

6.He identifies a logical fallacy in the article.

他指出了文章中的一个逻辑错误。

7.We'll talk about the Oklahoma sharpshooter fallacy.

我们现在来讲。俄克拉何马神枪手谬误。

8.Another fallacy promoted by sales reps.

又是一个销售代表宣扬的谬论。

9.The idea that all cats hate water is a common fallacy.

认为所有猫都讨厌水是一个常见的谬论。

10.Believing that a single event can define a person's character is a logical fallacy.

相信单一事件可以定义一个人的性格是一种逻辑谬论。

11.Many people fall into the fallacy of thinking that correlation implies causation.

许多人陷入了将相关性视为因果关系的谬论。

12.The argument that everyone is doing it is an example of a bandwagon fallacy.

“大家都在做”这个论点是从众谬论的一个例子。

13.It's a fallacy to assume that success in one area guarantees success in another.

假设在一个领域的成功能保证在另一个领域的成功是一个谬论。

作文

In the realm of critical thinking, understanding the concept of fallacy is crucial for effective reasoning and argumentation. A fallacy is defined as a mistaken belief or a flaw in reasoning that undermines the logical validity of an argument. These errors can be subtle and often go unnoticed, leading to misguided conclusions and decisions. By identifying and avoiding fallacies, individuals can enhance their ability to think critically and engage in meaningful discussions. One common type of fallacy is the ad hominem attack, where an argument is rebutted by attacking the character or motive of the person making it rather than addressing the substance of the argument itself. This tactic not only distracts from the actual issue but also diminishes the quality of discourse. For instance, during a debate about climate change, instead of discussing the scientific evidence, one might say, "You can't trust her opinion on this topic; she's not even a scientist." This statement exemplifies an ad hominem fallacy, as it shifts the focus away from the argument's merits. Another prevalent fallacy is the straw man argument, which occurs when someone misrepresents their opponent's position to make it easier to attack. For example, if one person advocates for more environmental regulations and their opponent responds by saying, "My opponent wants to shut down all factories and put everyone out of work," they are committing a straw man fallacy. Instead of engaging with the actual proposal, they create a distorted version that is easier to refute. The slippery slope fallacy is another logical misstep that suggests that a relatively small first step will inevitably lead to a chain of related events culminating in some significant (usually negative) effect. For example, arguing that if we allow students to redo tests, soon they will expect to retake every assignment, and eventually, they will demand to be graded on a curve for all subjects, illustrates this fallacy. While it is essential to consider potential consequences, the slippery slope fallacy often lacks sufficient evidence to support such drastic claims. Recognizing fallacies in everyday conversations, media, and political discourse is vital for fostering a more informed society. When people fall prey to fallacies, they may find themselves swayed by emotional appeals rather than logical reasoning, leading to poor decision-making. Educational institutions play a pivotal role in teaching students how to identify and counteract these logical errors. By incorporating critical thinking skills into the curriculum, educators can empower students to analyze arguments effectively and develop their reasoning abilities. Moreover, the rise of social media has amplified the prevalence of fallacies in public discourse. Misinformation can spread rapidly, and many individuals may share articles or opinions without verifying their accuracy. This phenomenon underscores the importance of media literacy and the need for individuals to scrutinize the information they consume. Understanding fallacies can help people navigate the complexities of modern communication and engage in more productive dialogues. In conclusion, the study of fallacies is essential for anyone seeking to improve their critical thinking skills and engage thoughtfully in discussions. By recognizing and avoiding these logical errors, individuals can contribute to more rational and respectful conversations. As we strive for clarity and understanding in our interactions, let us remain vigilant against the allure of fallacies and commit to upholding the principles of sound reasoning. Only then can we hope to foster a culture of thoughtful dialogue and informed decision-making.

在批判性思维的领域，理解谬论的概念对有效推理和论证至关重要。谬论被定义为一种错误的信念或推理中的缺陷，这会削弱论证的逻辑有效性。这些错误可能很微妙，常常被忽视，导致误导性的结论和决策。通过识别和避免谬论，个人可以增强他们的批判性思维能力，并参与有意义的讨论。 一种常见的谬论是人身攻击，即通过攻击提出论点的人的性格或动机来反驳论点，而不是解决论点的实质。这种策略不仅转移了对实际问题的关注，还降低了话语的质量。例如，在关于气候变化的辩论中，而不是讨论科学证据，有人可能会说：“你不能相信她在这个话题上的观点；她甚至不是科学家。”这个陈述就是一个人身攻击的谬论，因为它将注意力从论点的优点上转移开。 另一种普遍的谬论是稻草人论证，发生在某人歪曲对手的立场，使其更容易攻击。例如，如果一个人主张加强环境法规，而他们的对手回应说：“我的对手想关闭所有工厂，让每个人失业，”他们就犯了稻草人谬论。他们并没有参与实际的提议，而是创造了一个扭曲的版本，更容易被反驳。 滑坡谬论是另一种逻辑错误，表明相对较小的第一步将不可避免地导致一系列相关事件，最终导致某种重大（通常是负面）的效果。例如，争论如果我们允许学生重考，随后他们将期望重新做每一项作业，最终，他们将要求所有科目都按曲线评分，这说明了这种谬论。虽然考虑潜在后果是重要的，但滑坡谬论通常缺乏足够的证据来支持如此剧烈的主张。 在日常对话、媒体和政治话语中识别谬论对促进一个更有见识的社会至关重要。当人们受到谬论的影响时，他们可能会发现自己受到情感诉求的影响，而不是逻辑推理，从而导致糟糕的决策。教育机构在教导学生如何识别和反驳这些逻辑错误方面发挥着关键作用。通过将批判性思维技能纳入课程，教育者可以赋予学生有效分析论证的能力，并发展他们的推理能力。 此外，社交媒体的兴起加大了公共话语中谬论的普遍性。错误信息可以迅速传播，许多人可能在未验证其准确性的情况下分享文章或意见。这一现象突显了媒体素养的重要性，以及个人审查所消费信息的必要性。理解谬论可以帮助人们应对现代沟通的复杂性，并参与更具建设性的对话。 总之，研究谬论对于任何希望提高批判性思维技能并认真参与讨论的人来说都是必不可少的。通过识别和避免这些逻辑错误，个人可以为更理性和尊重的对话做出贡献。当我们努力在互动中追求清晰和理解时，让我们保持警惕，抵制谬论的诱惑，并承诺坚持健全推理的原则。只有这样，我们才能希望培养出一种深思熟虑的对话和明智决策的文化。