有时,威胁可能更微妙,如本例所示:我们需要一支强大的军队才能阻止我们的敌人。如果你不支持这个新的支出法案来开发更好的飞机,我们的敌人会认为我们很弱,并且在某些时候会攻击我们 – 杀死数百万人。你想对数百万人死亡负责吗,参议员?在这里,进行争论的人并没有直接的身体威胁。相反,他们通过暗示,如果参议员不投票支持拟议的支出法案,他们将带来心理压力,他/她将负责其他死亡事件。不幸的是,没有证据表明这种可能性是可信的威胁。因此,关于“我们的敌人”的前提与提议的法案符合国家最佳利益的结论之间没有明确的联系。我们还可以看到正在使用的情感诉求 – 没有人想要对数百万同胞的死亡负责。在没有提供实际身体暴力的情况下,也可能发生对武力上诉的谬误,而只是威胁到一个人的福祉。 Patrick J. Hurley在他的书“简明逻辑简介:老板的秘书”中使用了这个例子:我应该在来年加薪。毕竟,你知道我和你的妻子是多么友好,我相信你不会想让她知道你和你的性爱之间的客户之间发生了什么。在这里,老板和客户之间是否有任何不合适之处并不重要。重要的是,老板受到了威胁 – 不是像遭受打击那样的身体暴力,而是因为他的婚姻和其他个人关系如果不被破坏就会变得不稳定。

新西兰梅西大学政治论文代写:简明逻辑

Sometimes the threat may be more subtle, as shown in this example: we need a strong army to stop our enemies. If you don’t support this new spending bill to develop better aircraft, our enemies will think we are weak and will attack us at some point – killing millions. Do you want to be responsible for the deaths of millions of people, Senator? Here, there is no direct physical threat to those who argue. Instead, they hinted that if the senators do not vote for the proposed spending bill, they will bring psychological pressure and he/she will be responsible for other deaths. Unfortunately, there is no evidence that this possibility is a credible threat. Therefore, there is no clear link between the premise of “our enemy” and the conclusion that the proposed bill is in the best interests of the country. We can also see the emotional appeals being used – no one wants to be responsible for the deaths of millions of compatriots. In the absence of actual physical violence, it is also possible to delay the appeal of force, but only to threaten one’s well-being. Patrick J. Hurley used this example in his book “Introduction to Concise Logic: The Secretary of the Boss”: I should raise my salary in the coming year. After all, you know how friendly my wife and I are, I believe you won’t want her to know what is happening between the customers between you and your sex. It doesn’t matter if there is any inadequacy between the boss and the customer. What’s important is that the boss is threatened – not physically violent like a blow, but because his marriage and other personal relationships become unstable if not destroyed.

发表评论

电子邮件地址不会被公开。 必填项已用*标注