One aspect of a public forum is to discuss touchy issues. If you has the power to kick me out of here, do it. If not, well, watch your blood pressure level.
ChaseDream is the website where Chinese students share their various experiences. If you assume those "sharing" are "cheating", thus why you are here and look at those information? The only reason that would work according to your own assumption is that you are the person who wanna cheat.
Analysis: Background: ChaseDream is the website where Chinese students share their various experiences. Premise: You assume those sharing are cheating Intermediate conclusion: why you are here and look at those information. Main conclusion: The only reason that would work according to your own assumption is that you are the person who wanna cheat.
Flaw: 1) The premise is wrong. 2) "The ONLY reason that ..." is too restrictive to be a valid conclusion. To reach such a restrictive conclusion, you need some strong evidence to back it up. There is many a reason why people visit a website.
Chinese students used to be an epitome of dilligence, hardworking, and talents in the eys of admissions commiittee at U.S. schools. Now it is linked to forged undergraduate transcripts, cheated exams, and shameful conducts. Sadly, it follows the trend of things "Made in China."
-- by 会员 sdcar2010 (2011/12/30 1:25:32)
你丫有病吧，你明显香蕉人吧，回家cao自己吧
-- by 会员 evan3399 (2011/12/30 6:22:27)
Here is a fair example of what I am talking about: discrimination, foul language, etc., displayed in a public forum by a presumably proud CHINESE student.
According to GMAT rules, the logic used in your argument is wrong.
In God We Trust. Everyone else? Bring your argument!
Chinese students used to be an epitome of dilligence, hardworking, and talents in the eys of admissions commiittee at U.S. schools. Now it is linked to forged undergraduate transcripts, cheated exams, and shameful conducts. Sadly, it follows the trend of things "Made in China."
-- by 会员 sdcar2010 (2011/12/30 1:25:32)
你丫有病吧，你明显香蕉人吧，回家cao自己吧
-- by 会员 evan3399 (2011/12/30 6:22:27)
Here is a fair example of what I am talking about: discrimination, foul language, etc., displayed in a public forum by a presumably proud CHINESE student.
According to GMAT rules, the logic used in your argument is wrong.
In God We Trust. Everyone else? Bring your argument!
Ad hominem An ad hominem argument is any that attempts to counter another’s claims or conclusions by attacking the person, rather than addressing the argument itself. True believers will often commit this fallacy by countering the arguments of skeptics by stating that skeptics are closed minded. Skeptics, on the other hand, may fall into the trap of dismissing the claims of UFO believers, for example, by stating that people who believe in UFO’s are crazy or stupid.
A common form of this fallacy is also frequently present in the arguments of conspiracy theorists (who also rely heavily on ad-hoc reasoning). For example, they may argue that the government must be lying because they are corrupt.
It should be noted that simply calling someone a name or otherwise making an ad hominem attack is not in itself a logical fallacy. It is only a fallacy to claim that an argument is wrong because of a negative attribute of someone making the argument. (i.e. “John is a jerk.” is not a fallacy. “John is wrong because he is a jerk.” is a logical fallacy.)
The term “poisoning the well” also refers to a form of ad hominem fallacy. This is an attempt to discredit the argument of another by implying that they possess an unsavory trait, or that they are affiliated with other beliefs or people that are wrong or unpopular. A common form of this also has its own name – Godwin’s Law or the reductio ad Hitlerum. This refers to an attempt at poisoning the well by drawing an analogy between another’s position and Hitler or the Nazis.
[复制链接]
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2011-12-30 13:35:26
