Introductory Paragraph
In this argument, the author concludes that… To support his conclusion, the author points out that… In addition, the author reasons that… Furthermore, he also assumes that…While the author’s argument has some merit, it suffers from several logical flaws that deserve our attention. This line of reasoning is unconvincing for a couple of reasons.
In the first place, the major problem with this argument is that ...
In the second place ...
Last but not least ...
Flaws in evidence
1. Vested Interest
既得利益，一般是第一個攻擊點，后面用讓步語氣：即使它正確
eg（整體性：摘自廣告媒體，只會說自己產(chǎn)品的優(yōu)點，不會說缺點）: 12, 13, 15, 57, 65, 96
eg（局部性：report）:14, 70, 93, 998, 105, 110, 125，補11
We have strong reasons to question the creditability and neutrality of the survey in which the conductor has vested interest and, therefore is inclined to manipulate the figures to his own advantage/and therefore is prone to take the position to his own advantage.
2. Specious Evidence
eg: 9, 11, 12, 15, 25, 26, 28, 30, 6
To begin with, the statistics are intended to support the main claim that … But these statistics are vague and oversimplified, and thus many distort the state’s overall economic picture. For example, … Moreover, …at the same time… Finally, the poll indicates that … but fail to indicate…
3. Statistical Evidence
3.1 Insufficient sample
eg: 146, 115, 25, 98, 123, 134, 141
... might not be sufficient to gauge … that is, … Lacking information about … it is impossible to draw any reliable conclusion about ...
3.2 Respondent
必須要證明respondents can represent the population
respondents 和non respondents可能有區(qū)別 eg: 8, 15, 115
注意：
respondant還存在客觀性問題，respondents只代表觀點傾向，事實問題不能用這個調(diào)查
survey的備擇選項一定要全面
survey不可疊加問題
eg: 8, 15, 57, 63, 82, 115, 141
A threshold problem with the argument involves the statistical reliability of the survey. The author provides no evidence that the number of respondents is statistically significant or that the respondents were representative of A in general. Lacking information about the randomness and size of the survey’s sample, the author cannot make a convincing argument based on that survey.
Granted that…,
3.4 Vague Definition
3.5 Problematic Methodology
eg: 57, 63
3.6 Lack of Key information
3.7 Information too Vague
盡量少用
eg: 3, 15, 34, 82, 83, 103, 120
Fallacies
1. Fallacies concerning Generalization
1.1 Hasty Generalization (Insufficient Sample)
樣本太小，小范圍不可推及大范圍
— 這個小范圍很特殊
— 選另一個小范圍和原來那個比較有什么區(qū)別
eg: 數(shù)量上推廣：30 (more populated regions)，13 (Cumquat Cafe)，26 (Windfall)
eg: 范圍上推廣：8 (15% more residents)，112 (parents of first graders)
注意限定詞的修飾
The argument assumes that A is typical of all AA, as a group. However, this is not necessarily the case. (如果是統(tǒng)計數(shù)據(jù)的話：One problem with the argument involves the cited statistics about A) Depending on the total number/size of AA, it is entirely possible that A, are not representative of AA, generally. For example, perhaps A… (A的特殊性) If so, then the conclusion that… is completely unwarranted. In fact, in the face of such limited evidence it is fallacious to draw any conclusion at all.
1.2 Misapplied generalization
common sense 不一定能推及小范圍
eg: 71 (nation's cities, our region), 103 (nationwide, our university), 33 (national unemployment rates, Perks ), 138 (nation’s top five, Gazette)
Although the author assumes that AA reflects A in general (A is typical of AA/AA applies specifically to A), it supplies no evidence whatsoever to substantiate this assumption. It is entirely possible that A… (A的特殊性) If so, the author cannot justify his/her recommendation/conclusion, at least not based on AA.
2. Confusion in Causal Reasoning
2.1 Causal Over simplification
單現(xiàn)象A推出：A->B
— 指出Ａ不是Ｂ的原因
— 指出除了Ａ之外，還有其他原因?qū)е拢?BR> eg: 47, 30, 46
In the first place, no evidence has been offered to support the assumption that the reason of B is A. While A is an important contributing factor to B, it is not the only such factor. Many other reasons ------ C, D, E ------ could jus as like account for B. Lacking a detailed analysis of the reasons for B, if would be groundless/flawed to attribute B to A. (While it turns out that B has nothing to do with A, then the recommendation will probably not solve the problem.)
2.2 Post hoc, ergo propter hoc (After this, therefore because of this)
雙現(xiàn)象 A - B 推出 A -> B
注意時間狀語詞：since, after that,
To begin with, the author has engaged in “Post hoc, ergo propter hoc” reasoning. The only reason offered for believing that A caused B is the fact that the former preceded the latter. However, the evidence is insufficient to establish the claim in question because a mere chronological relationship is only one of the indicators of a causal relationship and, therefore, does not necessarily prove a causal relationship. To establish a general causal relationship, other factors that could bring about this result must be considered and eliminated. For example…. in addition…
2.3 Cum hoc, ergo propter hoc (Concurrence)
雙現(xiàn)象 A - B 推出 A -> B
注意時間狀語詞，coincide with, so do,
eg: 13, 38, 105, 135, 124
To begin with, the author’s argument is based on the assumption/claim that A is the cause of B. However, the fact that A coincides with B does not necessarily prove a causal connection between them. Other factors, such as C, could be responsible for A. this is fallacious reasoning unless other possible causal explanations have been considered and ruled out. For example, perhaps C is the cause of these events or perhaps A is caused by D.
3. Other Fallacies
3.1 False Analogy
錯誤的類比類推：
A有P的屬性，且A與B相似，則推出B有P的屬性
——指出A與B是有差異的，文中A屬性I，說明B沒有I
eg: 1
注意修飾詞：neighboring, nearby, on the next block
To begin with, the first reason rests on the assumption that A is analogous to B. But this assumption is weak, since although there are points of comparison between A and B, there are many dissimilarities as well. For example, I… These differences between A and B may preclude them from having a similar effect on C.
A做了T得到P，且A與B相似，則推出B做了T也能得到P
——雙重攻擊：指出A與B是有差異的，并且P不是T導致的
eg: 118
3.2 All things are equal
時間層面：過去不等于將來
地點層面
錯誤類型：結(jié)論是prediction
eg: 15, 25, 9, 31
Finally, the author’s conclusion depends on the questionable assumption that the background conditions of … have remained the same at the different time/are the same at different locations. (Admittedly, had ten years elapsed the argument would be even weaker.)Yet two years/eighteen months is sufficient time for a significant change in the overall …, C, D, E. Lacking evidence that A would continue …., the author cannot justify its recommendation/cannot justifiably conclude that…
3.3 False Dilemma (Black-or-White reasoning)
錯誤類型：探討either A or B, 推出結(jié)論
——A，B不互斥（not must exclusive）A，B可不可以一起做
——是否有第三個選擇C
eg: 85, 28, 71, 134, 15
The author assumes that A and B are mutually exclusive alternatives and there is no room for a middle ground. However, the author provides no reason for imposing an either/or choice. Both A and B might produce better results. Moreover, the author overlooks the possibility that C.
3.4 Appeal to Ignorance
錯誤類型：no evidence for A 推出 A錯誤
no evidence against A 推出A正確
complain題：
不投訴的人不代表滿意(no evidence)
及時投訴率低，還是需要比較同行業(yè)的水平（參照對象）
真正投訴的人是核心客戶，所以即使投訴率很低也不能neglect
eg: 10, 39, 110, 69, 123
The argument turns on the assumption that XX who did not complain were happy with … However, the author provides no evidence to support this assumption: lack of proof is not proof. It is entirely possible that many such XXX express their displeasure simply by not returning to … / It is possible that XXX are displeased but too busy to formally complain. Lacking more complete information about …, the author cannot assume that …
3.5 One-Sidedness
單方面分析，對一個問題，只針對它的優(yōu)點，或只針對它的缺點。
錯誤類型：要做A，A有優(yōu)點一，二，三
——要做A，條件是A的收益大于成本，或利大于弊
——列舉其他收益或成本
eg: 2, 7, 42
eg(收益成本):24, 44, 102, 106
The author fails to consider benefits/costs A might bring. For example, … It may turn out that such benefits/costs far outweigh the disadvantages/advantages. Because the author’s argument lacks a complete analysis of the situation, the author’s conclusion/recommendation cannot be taken seriously.
Hints from Conclusion
One Sidedness
Causation
Sufficiency
recommendation 是否能充分解決問題
eg: 40, 88, 94, 139
Necessity
recommendation 是否是的方案 false dilemma
注意 先攻擊sufficiency,再攻擊necessity
eg: 37, 75, 48
Content Paragraphs
Since the author commits the above mentioned logical mistakes and fails to consider the whole situation comprehensively, his ideas should not be adopted. The conclusion would be strengthened if he ...
In this argument, the author concludes that… To support his conclusion, the author points out that… In addition, the author reasons that… Furthermore, he also assumes that…While the author’s argument has some merit, it suffers from several logical flaws that deserve our attention. This line of reasoning is unconvincing for a couple of reasons.
In the first place, the major problem with this argument is that ...
In the second place ...
Last but not least ...
Flaws in evidence
1. Vested Interest
既得利益，一般是第一個攻擊點，后面用讓步語氣：即使它正確
eg（整體性：摘自廣告媒體，只會說自己產(chǎn)品的優(yōu)點，不會說缺點）: 12, 13, 15, 57, 65, 96
eg（局部性：report）:14, 70, 93, 998, 105, 110, 125，補11
We have strong reasons to question the creditability and neutrality of the survey in which the conductor has vested interest and, therefore is inclined to manipulate the figures to his own advantage/and therefore is prone to take the position to his own advantage.
2. Specious Evidence
eg: 9, 11, 12, 15, 25, 26, 28, 30, 6
To begin with, the statistics are intended to support the main claim that … But these statistics are vague and oversimplified, and thus many distort the state’s overall economic picture. For example, … Moreover, …at the same time… Finally, the poll indicates that … but fail to indicate…
3. Statistical Evidence
3.1 Insufficient sample
eg: 146, 115, 25, 98, 123, 134, 141
... might not be sufficient to gauge … that is, … Lacking information about … it is impossible to draw any reliable conclusion about ...
3.2 Respondent
必須要證明respondents can represent the population
respondents 和non respondents可能有區(qū)別 eg: 8, 15, 115
注意：
respondant還存在客觀性問題，respondents只代表觀點傾向，事實問題不能用這個調(diào)查
survey的備擇選項一定要全面
survey不可疊加問題
eg: 8, 15, 57, 63, 82, 115, 141
A threshold problem with the argument involves the statistical reliability of the survey. The author provides no evidence that the number of respondents is statistically significant or that the respondents were representative of A in general. Lacking information about the randomness and size of the survey’s sample, the author cannot make a convincing argument based on that survey.
Granted that…,
3.4 Vague Definition
3.5 Problematic Methodology
eg: 57, 63
3.6 Lack of Key information
3.7 Information too Vague
盡量少用
eg: 3, 15, 34, 82, 83, 103, 120
Fallacies
1. Fallacies concerning Generalization
1.1 Hasty Generalization (Insufficient Sample)
樣本太小，小范圍不可推及大范圍
— 這個小范圍很特殊
— 選另一個小范圍和原來那個比較有什么區(qū)別
eg: 數(shù)量上推廣：30 (more populated regions)，13 (Cumquat Cafe)，26 (Windfall)
eg: 范圍上推廣：8 (15% more residents)，112 (parents of first graders)
注意限定詞的修飾
The argument assumes that A is typical of all AA, as a group. However, this is not necessarily the case. (如果是統(tǒng)計數(shù)據(jù)的話：One problem with the argument involves the cited statistics about A) Depending on the total number/size of AA, it is entirely possible that A, are not representative of AA, generally. For example, perhaps A… (A的特殊性) If so, then the conclusion that… is completely unwarranted. In fact, in the face of such limited evidence it is fallacious to draw any conclusion at all.
1.2 Misapplied generalization
common sense 不一定能推及小范圍
eg: 71 (nation's cities, our region), 103 (nationwide, our university), 33 (national unemployment rates, Perks ), 138 (nation’s top five, Gazette)
Although the author assumes that AA reflects A in general (A is typical of AA/AA applies specifically to A), it supplies no evidence whatsoever to substantiate this assumption. It is entirely possible that A… (A的特殊性) If so, the author cannot justify his/her recommendation/conclusion, at least not based on AA.
2. Confusion in Causal Reasoning
2.1 Causal Over simplification
單現(xiàn)象A推出：A->B
— 指出Ａ不是Ｂ的原因
— 指出除了Ａ之外，還有其他原因?qū)е拢?BR> eg: 47, 30, 46
In the first place, no evidence has been offered to support the assumption that the reason of B is A. While A is an important contributing factor to B, it is not the only such factor. Many other reasons ------ C, D, E ------ could jus as like account for B. Lacking a detailed analysis of the reasons for B, if would be groundless/flawed to attribute B to A. (While it turns out that B has nothing to do with A, then the recommendation will probably not solve the problem.)
2.2 Post hoc, ergo propter hoc (After this, therefore because of this)
雙現(xiàn)象 A - B 推出 A -> B
注意時間狀語詞：since, after that,
To begin with, the author has engaged in “Post hoc, ergo propter hoc” reasoning. The only reason offered for believing that A caused B is the fact that the former preceded the latter. However, the evidence is insufficient to establish the claim in question because a mere chronological relationship is only one of the indicators of a causal relationship and, therefore, does not necessarily prove a causal relationship. To establish a general causal relationship, other factors that could bring about this result must be considered and eliminated. For example…. in addition…
2.3 Cum hoc, ergo propter hoc (Concurrence)
雙現(xiàn)象 A - B 推出 A -> B
注意時間狀語詞，coincide with, so do,
eg: 13, 38, 105, 135, 124
To begin with, the author’s argument is based on the assumption/claim that A is the cause of B. However, the fact that A coincides with B does not necessarily prove a causal connection between them. Other factors, such as C, could be responsible for A. this is fallacious reasoning unless other possible causal explanations have been considered and ruled out. For example, perhaps C is the cause of these events or perhaps A is caused by D.
3. Other Fallacies
3.1 False Analogy
錯誤的類比類推：
A有P的屬性，且A與B相似，則推出B有P的屬性
——指出A與B是有差異的，文中A屬性I，說明B沒有I
eg: 1
注意修飾詞：neighboring, nearby, on the next block
To begin with, the first reason rests on the assumption that A is analogous to B. But this assumption is weak, since although there are points of comparison between A and B, there are many dissimilarities as well. For example, I… These differences between A and B may preclude them from having a similar effect on C.
A做了T得到P，且A與B相似，則推出B做了T也能得到P
——雙重攻擊：指出A與B是有差異的，并且P不是T導致的
eg: 118
3.2 All things are equal
時間層面：過去不等于將來
地點層面
錯誤類型：結(jié)論是prediction
eg: 15, 25, 9, 31
Finally, the author’s conclusion depends on the questionable assumption that the background conditions of … have remained the same at the different time/are the same at different locations. (Admittedly, had ten years elapsed the argument would be even weaker.)Yet two years/eighteen months is sufficient time for a significant change in the overall …, C, D, E. Lacking evidence that A would continue …., the author cannot justify its recommendation/cannot justifiably conclude that…
3.3 False Dilemma (Black-or-White reasoning)
錯誤類型：探討either A or B, 推出結(jié)論
——A，B不互斥（not must exclusive）A，B可不可以一起做
——是否有第三個選擇C
eg: 85, 28, 71, 134, 15
The author assumes that A and B are mutually exclusive alternatives and there is no room for a middle ground. However, the author provides no reason for imposing an either/or choice. Both A and B might produce better results. Moreover, the author overlooks the possibility that C.
3.4 Appeal to Ignorance
錯誤類型：no evidence for A 推出 A錯誤
no evidence against A 推出A正確
complain題：
不投訴的人不代表滿意(no evidence)
及時投訴率低，還是需要比較同行業(yè)的水平（參照對象）
真正投訴的人是核心客戶，所以即使投訴率很低也不能neglect
eg: 10, 39, 110, 69, 123
The argument turns on the assumption that XX who did not complain were happy with … However, the author provides no evidence to support this assumption: lack of proof is not proof. It is entirely possible that many such XXX express their displeasure simply by not returning to … / It is possible that XXX are displeased but too busy to formally complain. Lacking more complete information about …, the author cannot assume that …
3.5 One-Sidedness
單方面分析，對一個問題，只針對它的優(yōu)點，或只針對它的缺點。
錯誤類型：要做A，A有優(yōu)點一，二，三
——要做A，條件是A的收益大于成本，或利大于弊
——列舉其他收益或成本
eg: 2, 7, 42
eg(收益成本):24, 44, 102, 106
The author fails to consider benefits/costs A might bring. For example, … It may turn out that such benefits/costs far outweigh the disadvantages/advantages. Because the author’s argument lacks a complete analysis of the situation, the author’s conclusion/recommendation cannot be taken seriously.
Hints from Conclusion
One Sidedness
Causation
Sufficiency
recommendation 是否能充分解決問題
eg: 40, 88, 94, 139
Necessity
recommendation 是否是的方案 false dilemma
注意 先攻擊sufficiency,再攻擊necessity
eg: 37, 75, 48
Content Paragraphs
Since the author commits the above mentioned logical mistakes and fails to consider the whole situation comprehensively, his ideas should not be adopted. The conclusion would be strengthened if he ...