should avoid logical errors - based one meter sunshine

editor's note: everyone should understand the point of logic, especially in the Internet age, more information and comments, we want to identify by logical thinking own inside the authenticity. In this regard, seal selected 20 kinds of logical thinking, the most common mistake (non logical thinking form, Informal Fallacies), and an explanation shall be made. ?

first of all, we see that several popular network "five Mao party" modus operandi:

to the wrong man

in the argument, we need to be concerned about the argument itself, rather than make a demonstration of the people. If a person ignore the argument and deliberately to attack the argument, then they would be in violation of the principle of. Called to the wrong man, in others is the debate, through the communication and argumentation irrelevant information to the public about the opponents, such as negative http://www.77cn.com.cn information in life, so as to achieve the purpose of defeating the opponent. This fallacy maker is designed to transfer the attention of the audience for argument, this is usually due to prove himself at a disadvantage.

if the argument is solely for the purpose of winning, ad hominem fallacy will play its role effectively. It can make the audience with the same arguments irrelevant reasons against your opponent, and you can use the same excuse to please the audience. Its consequences are, you can celebrate you beat the opponent, but it is what you did not do -- at least in logic. The value of your victory is not derived from the point of view, the ability to disrupt the audience but your listening.

by his hero

now if you are a reputation, experience. As part of the work, are you on the famous university and college national knowledge, and familiar with the basic situation of graduates. In particular, you know X Institute in this field gain extreme notoriety. At present, your company is recruiting an important post. In the browse information on candidates, you sweep to a X school graduate, Peter, so you immediately http://www.77cn.com.cn decided to turn them into the next round, just because they have graduated from the school. This moment, you have produced a fallacy.

is not to say that you are entirely unreasonable. After all, to your knowledge of X college, Peter may really not a qualified candidate. However, this is not necessary.

A shiny star is probably due to similar X college or school. The root of error you made: know a general source is bad, so that all for this source must be bad. This does not necessarily set.

consider something or someone that we investigate the origin is certainly necessary. But we must go further. First, we need to ask: where does Peter come from? Then, the more important question is: his quality and how?

[note] the

seal two kinds of logical error mainly lies in the debate is not in the subject but in the argument that people. "Romance of the Three Kingdoms" >

编者按：每个人都应该懂点逻辑学，特别是在网络时代，更多的信息和评论发表，我们要通过自己的逻辑思考来辨别里面的真伪。对此，弥缝选出最常见的20种逻辑思维错误（非逻辑思维形式，Informal Fallacies），并予以说明。?

首先，我们看这几种网络上流行的"五毛党"惯用的伎俩：

对人不对事

在论证中，我们要关注的是论证本身，而不是做出论证的人。如果一个人忽略论证本身而故意去攻击论证者，那么他们就违反了这个原则。所谓的对人不对事，就是在他人辩论时，通过向公众传达关于对手的与论证无关的信息，例如生活中的负面信息，以此来达到击败对手的目的。这种谬误制造者的目的是转移听众对论证的注意力，这种情形通常是由于论证者本人处于劣势。

如果论证的目的仅仅是获胜，对人不对事谬误将会有效地发挥作用。它可以使听众以同论证毫不相关的理由来反对你的对手，而你则可以用同样的理由来取悦听众。它造成的后果是，你可以庆祝你战胜了对手，但恰恰是你所没有做到的的至少在逻辑上。你的胜利并非源于观点的价值，而是源于你扰乱听众视听的能力。

以出身论英雄

现在假设你是一个声誉斐然的公司的从事经验。作为工作的一部分，你对全国著名的大学和学院知之甚多，并且对毕业生的基本情况了如指掌。尤其，你知道X学院在这个领域内声名狼藉。目前，你的公司正在招聘一个重要的职位。在浏览候选人资料时，你扫到一个X学院

的毕业生，彼得，于是你立刻决定拒绝他们进入下一轮，仅仅是因为他们所毕业的学校。这个时刻，你已经产生了谬误。

不是说你的决定完全不合理。毕竟，以你对X学院的了解，彼得或许确实不是一名合格的人选。但是，这不是必然的。一颗闪亮的新星是可能出于类似X学院之类的学校的。你所犯的谬误的根源如下：知道一个来源一般是坏的，于是认定出于这个来源的所有都一定是坏的。这并不必然成立。

考虑我们所考察的人或事的出身肯定是必要的。但是我们必须走得更远。首先我们要问：彼得从哪里来？紧接着，更关键的问题是：他的品质如何？

【弥缝注】这两种逻辑错误主要在于辩论方向不在论题上而是参与论证的人上。《三国演义》中诸葛亮舌战群雄中吴国儒士的问话："曹操虽挟天子以令诸侯，犹是相国曹参之后。刘豫州虽云中山靖王苗裔，却无可稽考，眼见只是织席贩屦之夫耳，何足与曹操抗衡哉！"和"孔明所言，皆强词夺理，均非正论，不必再言。且请问孔明治何经典？"其中都是对刘备和诸葛亮进行人身攻击一个织席的和一个没写过经典著作的两个人如何能登大雅之堂，论国家大事。另外一些例子，如"他父亲是个罪犯，所以他的儿子也不是一个好人"等。

稻草人谬误

论证中，我们要对事不对人，要紧扣论证中给定的论点。在与他人辩论的过程中，如果你为了消弱对方的论点而故意扭曲其论证过程，那就犯了稻草人谬误。在这个比喻中，"稻草人"意味着容易对付的事物。在我们误解某个论证时，或是当一些论证非常复杂，我们在理解上犯了一些无意的错误时，我们犯的并不是这种谬误。稻草人谬误不是无心之过，因为它是在有意地歪曲别人的论点。

【弥缝注】常见的稻草人谬误，如对论点进行断章取义和偷换概念。比如说这篇新华网文章（随机搜索到的），倒数第二段中提到"美国还是世界上最主要的过滤软件生产国，世界各国封堵信息使用的过滤软件大多数都是美国公司生产的"和前面 …… 此处隐藏：2618字，全部文档内容请下载后查看。喜欢就下载吧 ……