修辞与写作/逻辑谬误
< 修辞与写作
逻辑谬误也被称为“言语谬误”。在建立有根据的论点时，需要有证据支持主张。推理被用来使证据在使主张有效方面相关。但有时由于推理错误，导致未能提供足够的论据，使论据变弱。以下是几种最常见的谬误示例
因果关系错误 也称为“后此谬误”。它假设事件的顺序是因果关系，认为事件链彼此紧密相连，第一个事件导致了第二个事件，依此类推。
example: "Construction workers are dumb."
错误类比 类比总是比较两个或多个在某种程度上相似的状况。在这种情况下，两种状况被错误地认为彼此相似，导致错误类比。
example: "Japan quit fighting in 1945 when we dropped nuclear bombs on them.
We should use nuclear bombs against other countries."
从众心理 这源于错误的推理，即每个人都在做，所以你为什么不应该做？但实际上并非每个人都参与其中，而且它持有错误的理由去做。
example: It doesn't matter if I do not cite the sources of my reference, no
one else cares to do it.
非此即彼 它表明，对于给定的复杂情况，只有两个二元对立的选择。这在实际情况下很少出现。
example: "Either we eliminate the regulation of business or else profits will
suffer." (It ignores hosts of other possibilities for incurring losses)
人身攻击 字面意思是“针对个人”。这种形式的错误推理旨在针对个人进行人身攻击，而不是进行理性推理。
example: My opponent is against the supporting the bill; I think he probably
has some vested interest for not supporting it.
诉诸大众 字面意思是“诉诸大众”。它是基于使用读者的偏见和偏见，而不是合理的推理。
example: We cannot allow to open Indian restaurants in this suburb which is
predominantly white based. Indian cuisine is very hot and spicy,
and therefore, unhealthy for our diet.
循环论证 当将主张作为证据，假定为事实，而实际上应该被证明时，就会发生这种情况。
example: "People should be able to say anything they want to because free
speech is an individual right."
滑坡谬误 它认为，某些事件链无论如何都会发生，并将导致另一个事件。
example: "If we grant citizenship to illegal immigrants, no one will bother
to enter the country legally."
稻草人谬误 设置反驳论点为弱势，以便它们可以很容易地被驳斥。
example: "Environmentalist won't be satisfied until not a single human being
is allowed to enter a national park."
红鲱鱼 这是一种策略，它引入虚假或不相关的论点来分散读者对主要论点的注意力。
example: Personal income taxes should be reduced because there are too many
essential bills that need to be paid.
两极分化 它通过将他们的主张定位为极端或非理性来诉诸对立场或群体的夸大。
example: "Feminists are all man-haters."
免责声明：引号下的示例取自“企鹅简明手册”（第二版）。