ARGUMENT 7 宗罪

1、无因果联系 The author commits a fallacy of causal oversimplification. The line of the reasoning is that because A occurred before B, the former event is responsible for the latter. The author uses the positive correlation between A and B to establish causality. However, the fact that A coincides with B does not necessarily prove that A caused B. But 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 B is caused by D. Any further linkage of these two phenomena requires more evidence and is not justified by the data so far available, Comprehensive analysis is necessary to identify the actual cause of 2、Insufficient sample The evidence the author provides is insufficient to support the conclusion drawn from it. One example is logically unsounded establish a general conclusion (The statistics from only a few recent years are not necessarily a good indicator of the future trends, unless it can be shown that A 1 is representative of all A. It possible that, in fact, in face of such limited evidence, the conclusion that B is completely unwarranted. The author does not take into account the possibility that The arguer fails to rule out the possibility that The arguer fails to provide any sufficient evidence to support the assumption that The arguer ignores/neglects other relevant factors concerning 3、Based on a false analogy The argument rests on the assumption that A is analogous to B in all respects. This assumption is weak since there are points of comparison between A and B, there is much dissimilarity as well. For example, A, however, B, Thus, it is likely much more difficult for B to do The argument fails to take into account the possible differences between A and B that are relevant to the conclusion. However, the problem is that the two situations are not similar enough to justify the analogical deduction. It is highly doubtful that the fact drawn from … are applicable to … Differences between the two industries clearly outweigh the similarities, thus making the analogy highly less than valid. For example, problems of … all affect … but are virtually absent in. The argument rests on the assumption that a promotional strategy that works for one company will work for another. However, … and … may not be sufficiently similar to warrant the assumption. Differences between … and … could mollify this result. Lacking detailed information about, it is difficult to access the author’s conclusion. 4、All things are equal The author commits the fallacy of “all things are equal”. The fact that happened two years ago is not a sound evidence to draw a conclusion that The author assumes without justification that the background conditions have remained the same at different times or at different locations. However, it is not clear in this argument whether the current conditions at A are the same as they used to be two years ago. Thus it is impossible to conclude that The argument ignores the possibility that the trend may change within in the next decade…might turn to This will lead to The argument assumes that relative conditions will remain unchanged over the next twenty years. However, the author overlooks that…may fluctuate/trend may change greatly over a long time period. This may affect…, which in turn may lead to 5、Either-or choice 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. Common sense tells us that adjusting both A and B might produce better results. The author is presenting a false dilemma by imposing an either-or choice/fallacy between two courses of action that need not be mutually exclusive. 6、Survey is doubtful The study cited in the editorial may be defective because the total number of … was not specified. Had the author indicated that…, the fact that would greatly support author’s reasoning. Conversely, the conclusion would be much weaker. Had the author indicated that, the argument would be more convincing. Data gathered from a three-month period is insufficient to set up a conclusive conclusion for a year period. Perhaps, the three-month period chosen is idiosyncratic and not representative of entire year’s A difference of only 3 precent during one particular week can easily be accounted for by other factors, such as or by problems with reporting or sampling. The respondents’ views are not necessarily representative of the views of in general. If it turns out, for example, that only those respond to the survey, the conclusion would be dramatically weakened. Without information regarding the way in which were selected, it is unconvincing to infer that Without knowing how the survey was conducted, it is impossible to assess the credibility of the study. 7、、Gratuitous assumption The author falsely depends on gratuitous assumption that, however, no evidence is stated in the argument to support this assumption. In fact, this is not necessarily the case. For example, it is more likely that, Therefore, this argument is unwarranted without ruling out such possibility. It is unreasonable/ unwarranted to assume The arguer takes for granted without justification that The argument depends on a questionable assumption that 结尾段： In conclusion, the author’s argument provides inadequate justification for …/ As it stands, the argument takes into account only a limited number of …., To better evaluate the argument, we must first , and conduct a thorough cost-benefit analysis of e