Item 1

Suy diễn

Ông chồng và bà vợ đang tranh luận về việc nấu nướng. Bà vợ cho rằng nấu khoai tây thì mỗi nồi chỉ nên cho một muỗng muối trong khi ông chồng cho rằng hai muỗng thì ngon hơn.

Ông chồng nhẹ nhàng: “Tôi nghĩ, trong chuyện này mình không hẳn đúng đâu”.

“Cái gì? Tôi không đúng? Ông nói thế là ý gì hả? Ông định nói rằng tôi không đúng. Ông định nói là tôi hoàn toàn sai chứ gì? Tôi sai nghĩa là tôi đã nói dối phải không! Tôi nói dối thì có nghĩa là tôi ăn nói không như một con người. Ông định nói là tôi sủa bậy như con cún phải không? Ối mẹ ơi, chồng con nó kêu con là chó. Mẹ ơi!
Source:  http://cuoi.xitrum.net/danong/77.html
– Deductively invalid, inductively weak argument.
– Error: fallacies of content (fallacies of presumption – Slippery slope)
– Analyze: Arguments of the wife contain false premises and lack premises, and so fail to establish their conclusion.
I am not true
Then I am completely wrong
Then I am the liar
Then I am not likely a human
Then I bark like a puppy
Then I am a dog

Item 2: TVC quảng cáo Sữa nước Cô Gái Hà Lan + Mới


Source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hfe3mCm1Oz4
– Deductively invalid, inductively weak argument.
– Error:
1. Structural fallacies (fallacies of denying the antecedent).
– Analyze:
“Dutch girl milk plus” (A) helps develop children’s height, health and brain (B)
Anyone do not buy “Dutch girl milk plus” for their children (Not A)
Then their children could not develop their height, health and brain (Not B)
2. Content fallacies (fallacy of presumption – hasty generalization)
– Analyze: “Dutch girl milk plus” helps develop celebrities’ children’s height, health and brain does not mean that it can help all children develop their height, health and brain.

Item 3:

Source: http://vn.360plus.yahoo.com/casyphuonglinh/article?mid=59&page=3
– Deductively invalid, inductively weak argument.
– Error:
1. Structural fallacies (fallacies of denying the antecedent)
– Analyze:
If you drink pepsi then you will look cool (A), active and creative like Ha Anh Tuan and Phuong Linh (B)
You don’t drink pepsi (Not A)
Therefore you couldn’t look cool, active and creative (Not B)
2. Content fallacies (fallacy of presumption – Fallacy of Relevance)
– Analyze: it is the fact that Ha Anh Tuan and Phuong Linh look cool but it is irrelevant to drinking pepsi. People can also look cool without drinking pepsi but by other ways.

2 responses »

  1. All your items are carefully analyzed. However, in item 2, I don’t find any kind of the premise that any one does not buy Dutch girl milk for their children, their children will not develop physically.
    If it has, please specify it.
    Thanks

  2. Hi Chi, I am very impressed on your entry 4 with three good items as well as specific analyzes. However, in my opinion, in your item 2, the analyze is problematic. You supposed that the message which the ad want to say is “Anyone do not buy “Dutch girl milk plus” for their children, then their children could not develop their height, health and brain “. I do not think it is producer’ mean. The ad just want to say that if your children use this product, then it will help them develop height, health and brain because the product contains some kinds of nutrition which is good for children’s development. I think you should pay attention to that.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s