第一宗罪：無(wú)因果聯(lián)系
The author commits a fallacy of causaloversimplification. The line of the reasoning is that because Aoccurred before B, the former event is responsible for the latter.(The author uses the positive correlation between A and B toestablish causality. However, the fact that A coincides with B doesnot necessarily prove that A caused B.) But this is fallaciousreasoning unless other possible causal explanations have beenconsidered and ruled out. For example, perhaps C is the cause ofthese events or perhaps B is caused by D.
第二宗罪 樣本不足
The evidence the author provides is insufficient tosupport the conclusion drawn from it. One example is logicallyunsounded to establish a general conclusion (The statistics fromonly a few recent years are not necessarily a good indicator offuture trends), unless it can be shown that A1 is representative ofall A. It is possible that.... In fact, in face of such limitedevidence, the conclusion that B is completely unwarranted.
第三宗罪: 錯誤類(lèi)比
The argument rests on the assumption that A isanalogous to B in all respects. This assumption is weak, sincealthough there are points of comparison between A and B, there ismuch dissimilarity as well. For example, A..., however, B.... Thus,it is likely much more difficult for B to do....
第四宗罪 時(shí)地全等
The author commits the fallacy of “all things areequal”. The fact that happened two years ago is not a soundevidence to draw a conclusion that.... The author assumes withoutjustification that the background conditions have remained the sameat different times or at different locations. However, it is notclear in this argument whether the current conditions at AA are thesame as they used to be two years ago. Thus it is impossible toconclude that....
第五宗罪 二者擇一
The author assumes that AA and BB are mutuallyexclusive alternatives and there is no room for a middle ground.However, the author provides no reason for imposing an either-orchoice. Common sense tells us that adjusting both AA and BB mightproduce better results.
第六宗罪 可疑調查
The poll cited by the author is too vague to beinformative. The claim does not indicate who conducted the poll,who responded, or when, where and how the poll was conducted.(Lacking information about the number of people surveyed and thenumber of respondents, it is impossible to access the validity ofthe results. For example, if 200 persons were surveyed but only 2responded, the conclusion that...would be highly suspect. Becausethe argument offers no evidence that would rule out this kind ofinterpretations,) Until these questions are answered, the resultsof the survey are worthless as evidence for the conclusion.
第七宗罪 結論無(wú)據
The author falsely depends on gratuitous assumptionthat.... However, no evidence is stated in the argument to supportthis assumption. In fact, this is not necessarily the case. Forexample, it is more likely that.... Therefore, this argument isunwarranted without ruling out such possibility
聯(lián)系客服
