适用于亚微米沟道MO SFET的阈值电压解析模型.doc

关于Argument中理清谬误攻击顺序的入门帖Argument中的另一个比较重要的问题，就是在逻辑谬误找出来之后，如何来理清攻击顺序的问题。有些战友可能会觉得，反正都是攻击，就是那么几个谬误，顺序有什么重要的。其实不然，顺序也是很重要的，尤其是“逻辑顺序”，如果安排好了，更是能体现你在逻辑思维上的优点；而这也正是argument的一个重要的考察点，因此对于攻击的顺序也有必要来学习一下。下面一篇仍然是前段时间我帮同学批改作文过程中，发现的一篇可以拿来分析攻击顺序的习作。和上次的关于argument谬误攻击深度的入门帖一样，也只能算是我个人对于这个问题的一点看法。那么，让我们开始吧。首先仍然是题目：The following appeared in a proposal from the economic minister of the country of Paraterra.In order to strengthen its lagging economy, last year the government of the nearby country of Bellegea began an advertising campaign to promote ecologically sound tourism (ecotourism). This year the number of foreign visitors arriving at Bellegeas main airport doubled, and per capita income in Bellegea increased by ten percent. To provide more income for the population of Paraterra and also preserve the natural environment of our tiny country, we too should begin to promote ecotourism. To ensure that our advertising campaign is successful, we should hire the current director of Bellegeas National Tourism Office as a consultant for the campaign.接下去是习作的中间段部分（开头、结尾隐去了，因为和主题没有太大的关系），另外一些基本的错误也已经改掉了：To begin with, the author commits a fallacy of “false analogy” between Bellegea and Paraterra. Since there is no evidence pointing out that these two countries have similar situation, the authors conclusion sounds unconvincing. It is entirely possible that these two countries are of different type, it might be that Bellegea is a country with beautiful natural sites which is suitable for visiting. To the contrary, Paraterra is an economic country with few or even none natural sites. It is possible that most visitors in Paraterra are people who have business there. Thus we cannot convince that a similar situation will happen in Paraterra. 这段攻击的谬误是两个国家之间的false analogy。Moreover, the author fails to provide more specific information and statistic to substantiate the conclusion that the increasing of visitors was caused by the advertising campaign which they began last year. Lacking such evidence, the conclusion cannot render it convincing. It is quite possible that during last year, it was the terrible weather which made less than usual visitors there. Further more the especially appealing weather made more than usual visitors there. Unless the author can provide evidence to ruling out this or other possibility , I cannot convince what the author assumes.这段攻击的是广告推广活动是否能够作为游客人数增加的原因。细心的朋友可能会发现其实游客人数是否真的增加也是一个可以攻击的地方。Further more, the author makes a logical flaw that more visitors will benefit its natural environment. Common sense informs us that the more people visit, the worse environment becomes. Since human beings and also all animals are creatures that create litter everyday. It is inevitably that visitors will take rubbish which might be unintentional. Therefore, the author makes it unsound that more visitors will lead to preserve its environment. 这个是我当时觉得并不是十分合适的谬误，大致意思是“生态旅游”可能会事与愿违。这个问题暂且不论。Last but not least, the author makes a false analogy again. As the author assume that Hiring Bellegeas National Tourism Office as a consultant will lead to success. Since the author does not provide the project Bellegeas National Tourism Office did in Bellegea which made its successful, and the similarity of these two countries, the conclusion sounds unreliable. 这里攻击的谬误是Bellegea的国家旅游部长能否在Paraterra胜任。当然细心的读者会发现这里攻击的深度不够。The following appeared in a proposal from the economic minister of the country of Paraterra.In order to strengthen its lagging economy, last year the government of the nearby country of Bellegea began an advertising campaign to promote ecologically sound tourism (ecotourism). This year the number of foreign visitors arriving at Bellegeas main airport doubled, and per capita income in Bellegea increased by ten percent. To provide more income for the population of Paraterra and also preserve the natural environment of our tiny country, we too should begin to promote ecotourism. To ensure that our advertising campaign is successful, we should hire the current director of Bellegeas National Tourism Office as a consultant for the campaign.临近国家Bellegea的政府为促进其落后的经济，去年开展了一项对生态旅游的广告推广。今年到达Bellegea主要机场的外国游客数量翻了一番，人均收入增加了10%。为增加Paraterra居的收入并保护我们有限国土的天然环境，我们也应该推广生态旅游。为保证我们广告策略的成，我们应该雇佣Bellegea现任国家旅游局的主任来担任广告的顾问。1. False analogy这两国家间。2. 生态游好像不太可能preserve environment。3. 今年人上升不等于明年还这样。而且外国游客又不等于总人数增加。4. Hire (那个office作为consultant)不等于successful。把题目、翻译、以及同学的提纲都列在这里，以便分析。从习作中，不难看出作者对谬误的攻击顺序是这样的：两个国家之间的false analogy-广告推广活动是否能够作为游客人数增加的原因-“生态旅游”可能会事与愿违-Bellegea的国家旅游部长能否在Paraterra胜任。大家可以看出，这里谬误是都找出来了，但是却没有安排好顺序，感觉对于每个谬误的攻击都是在各自为战，文章整体感觉也就很比较散乱，没有一个很明确的线条。回过来看题目。因为作者援引的是邻国Bellegea的情况，那么我们先来看它的情况。“临近国家Bellegea的政府为促进其落后的经济，去年开展了一项对生态旅游的广告推广。今年到达Bellegea主要机场的外国游客数量翻了一番，人均收入增加了10%”，那么这里可以有两个谬误可找：1）到达主要机场的外国游客数量翻倍，是否真是来旅游的人增多了？可以反驳的是：达到机场并不一定表示来游玩，可能是转机；或者是来Bellegea的，但是却是为了繁忙的公务，而无暇顾及旅游的。因此今凭借这一个数据，无法说明Bellegea的旅游业发展了。2）即使Bellegea的旅游业真的发展了，那么也不一定是因为去年开展的生态旅游的广告推广的功劳。A fallacy of “after this, therefore because of this”。可能有其他原因，譬如游客的新偏好刚好在这里能够满足，而不是去那些在广告推广中提及的那些景点。注意我这里把“即使”加粗了，是为了强调如何把逻辑思维理顺的问题。一个argument逻辑错误一般会有3个到4个；然而反驳的时候，并不能仅仅按照题目里错误出现的顺序，或者自己在找出谬误的顺序来安排文章的结构。一般来说要重新组织一下，来使文章完成后，感觉有一条线贯穿着整篇文章。这条线很重要，不然文章就会很散，有很零乱的感觉。像刚才分析的那两个错误，对应着题目里的两句话：生态旅游的广告推广，以及到达Bellegea主要机场的外国游客数量翻了一番。“到达Bellegea主要机场的外国游客数量翻了一番”是为了来说明广告推广的效果的，那么我们首先就应该对这个效果进行攻击，因为如果效果都有逻辑错误的话，那么这项推广活动是否有用就更无从谈起了。接下来，退一步，做一个让步，即使（even），承认效果，但攻击它不一定是广告推广的功劳。这样是不感觉就有层次一点了？文章有点递进的感觉，逻辑是不也就顺了一点呢？此外，还可以继续让步，承认是广告推广活动的功劳，但是仅有去年一年的情况还不足以说明问题。就像提纲里的第三点的前半部分。接下来，也是一样。“为增加Paraterra居