|
the conclusion of the author is "people are not as concerned as they were a decade ago about regulating their intake of red meat and fatty cheeses the author has two evidence : 1, a store that started selling organic fruits and vegetables still sells cheeses and meat无因果联系 2,the owners of vegetarian restaurant make a much more modest living than the owners of the new House of Beef gratuitous assumption 结论无据
the conclusion In this argument is that people are not as concerned as they were a decade ago about regulating their intake of red meat and fatty cheeses. In support of this conclusion the arguer supplies the evidence that ．．．
the author commits a fallacy of causal oversimplification. 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.
futhermore , the author falsely depends on gratuitous assumption that the owners of vegetarian restaurant make less profits than the owners of the new House of Beef . 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
last but not least , it is necessary to point out that even it is ture that the owners of vegetarian restaurant make less profits than the owners of the new House of Beef , hardly can somebody conclude that people are not as concerned as they were a decade ago about regulating their intake of red meat and fatty cheeses.there are planty of other possible conclusions can be made by the fact that A is poorer than B.
the conclusion In this argument is that people are not as concerned as they were a decade ago about regulating their intake of red meat and fatty cheeses. In support of this conclusion the arguer supplies the evidence that ．．．
the author commits a fallacy of causal oversimplification. 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.
futhermore , the author falsely depends on gratuitous assumption that the owners of vegetarian restaurant make less profits than the owners of the new House of Beef . 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
last but not least , it is necessary to point out that even it is ture that the owners of vegetarian restaurant make less profits than the owners of the new House of Beef , hardly can somebody conclude that people are not as concerned as they were a decade ago about regulating their intake of red meat and fatty cheeses.there are planty of other possible conclusions can be made by the fact that A is poorer than B.
| 
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2008-9-17 01:22:00
楼主
