标题: 弱问大全一道题...有关similar reasoning [打印本页] 作者: geniussy321 时间: 2010-8-9 23:15 标题: 弱问大全一道题...有关similar reasoning Dr. A: The new influenza vaccine is useless at best and possibly dangerous. I would never use it on a patient. Dr. B: But three studies published in the Journal of Medical Associates have rated that vaccine as unusually effective. Dr. A: The studies must have been faulty because the vaccine is worthless. In which of the following is the reasoning most similar to that of Dr. A? (A) Three of my patients have been harmed by that vaccine during the past three weeks, so the vaccine is unsafe. (B) Jerrold Jersey recommends this milk, and I don’t trust Jerrold Jersey, so I won’t buy this milk. (C) Wingzz tennis balls perform best because they are far more effective than any other tennis balls. (D) I’m buying Vim Vitamins. Doctors recommend them more often than they recommend any other vitamins, so Vim Vitamins must be good. (E) Since University of Muldoon graduates score about 20 percent higher than average on the GMAT, Sheila Lee, a University of Muldoon graduate, will score about 20 percent higher than average when she takes the GMAT. 请问similar reasoning有没有哪些种类？这里的思路是什么...答案是C...作者: geniussy321 时间: 2010-8-10 08:39
自己顶一下...作者: elaine2011 时间: 2011-1-23 18:30 为什么没回答作者: sdcar2010 时间: 2011-1-23 23:03
The logical fallacy committed by Doctor A is circular reasoning. So is answer C.作者: qiushuan 时间: 2011-7-10 14:09
The logical fallacy committed by Doctor A is circular reasoning. So is answer C.
-- by 会员 sdcar2010 (2011/1/23 23:03:01)
what is a circular reasoning? can u use this problem as an example? thanks!作者: sdcar2010 时间: 2011-7-10 20:14
Circular reasoning is a formal logical fallacy in which the proposition to be proved is assumed implicitly or explicitly in one of the premises.
It's like saying, "A is B, therefore A is B."
For example:
"Only an untrustworthy person would run for office. The fact that politicians are untrustworthy is proof of this."
Such an argument is fallacious, because it relies upon its own proposition — "politicians are untrustworthy" — in order to support its central premise. Essentially, the argument assumes that its central point is already proven, and uses this in support of itself.
为什么没回答