这种威胁在逻辑上与结论相关,或者由这种威胁使结论的真值变得更不可能,这是非常不寻常的。 当然,应该在理性原因和审慎原因之间进行区分。 包括“诉诸上诉”在内的任何谬论都不能给出合理的理由相信结论。 但是,这可能会给出采取行动的审慎理由。 如果威胁是可信且足够严重的,则可能会提供一个采取行动的方式,就好像您相信它一样。 听到这样的儿童谬论更常见,例如,当一个人说“如果您不同意这场表演是最好的,我会打您!” 不幸的是,这种谬论不仅限于儿童。

新西兰哲学Essay代写:儿童谬论

This threat is logically related to the conclusion, or the truth value of the conclusion is made more impossible by this threat, which is very unusual. Of course, a distinction should be made between rational and prudent reasons. No fallacy, including “appeal to appeal”, gives reasonable grounds to believe in a conclusion. However, this may give prudent reasons for action. If the threat is credible and severe enough, it may provide a way to act as if you believed it. It is more common to hear such child fallacy, for example, when a person says “If you disagree that the show is the best, I will hit you!” Unfortunately, this fallacy is not limited to children.

发表评论

电子邮件地址不会被公开。 必填项已用*标注