抑制证据谬误在关于归纳论证的讨论中，解释了一个有说服力的归纳论证如何必须同时具有良好的推理和真实的前提。但所有包含的前提必须是真实的事实也意味着必须包括所有真实的前提。如果出于任何原因遗漏了真实的相关信息，则会提出称为“抑制证据”的谬误。被压制证据的谬误被归类为推定的谬误，因为它产生了真实前提是完整的假设。例子和讨论。以下是Patrick Hurley使用的抑制证据的一个例子：1。大多数狗都是友好的，对宠爱它们的人没有任何威胁。因此，养宠物现在接近我们的小狗是安全的。应该可以想象各种可能是真实的东西，这些东西与手头的问题高度相关。狗可能会咆哮并保护它的家。或者它甚至可能在嘴里起泡，暗示狂犬病。这是另一个类似的例子：2。这种类型的汽车制造不良;我的一个朋友有一个，它不断给他带来麻烦。这似乎是一个合理的评论，但有许多事情可能没有说明。例如，朋友可能不会好好照顾汽车，也可能无法定期换油。或者这位朋友可能会把自己想象成一名机械师而且只是做了一件糟糕的工作。也许抑制证据的谬误最常见的用途是广告。大多数营销活动都会提供有关产品的精彩信息，但也会忽略有问题或不良信息。 3.当您使用数字线时，您可以在家中的每一组上观看不同的频道，而无需购买昂贵的额外设备。但是对于卫星电视，你必须为每套设备购买额外的设备。因此，数字电缆是更好的价值。以上所有前提都是正确的，并且可以得出结论。但他们没有注意到的事实是，如果你是一个人 – 那种通常似乎是广告主题的人，奇怪的是 – 很少或根本不需要在多台电视上使用独立电缆。因为这些信息被忽略了，所以上述论证提出了被压抑证据的谬误。我们有时也会在科学研究中看到这种谬论，只要有人专注于支持他们的假设的证据，而忽略了往往会使其失去信心的数据。这就是为什么重要的是，实验可以被其他人复制，并且关于如何进行实验的信息被释放。其他研究人员可能会捕获最初被忽略的数据。
英国伯明翰大学心理学Essay代写:Suppressed Evidence Fallacy
Suppressed Evidence FallacyIn the discussion about inductive arguments, it is explained how a cogent inductive argument had to have both good reasoning and true premises. But the fact that all included premises have to be true also means that all true premises have to be included. When true and relevant information is left out for any reason, the fallacy called Suppressed Evidence is committed. The fallacy of Suppressed Evidence is categorized as a Fallacy of Presumption because it creates the presumption that the true premises are complete. Examples and Discussion. Here is an example of Suppressed Evidence used by Patrick Hurley: 1. Most dogs are friendly and pose no threat to people who pet them. Therefore, it would be safe to pet the little dog that is approaching us now. It should be possible to imagine all sorts of things which might be true and which would be highly relevant to the issue at hand. The dog might be growling and protecting its home. Or it might even be foaming at the mouth, suggesting rabies. Here is another, similar example: 2. That type of car is poorly made; a friend of mine has one, and it continually gives him trouble. This might seem like a reasonable comment, but there are many things which might be left unsaid. For example, the friend might not take good care of the car and might not get the oil changed regularly. Or maybe the friend fancies himself as a mechanic and just does a lousy job. Perhaps the most common use of the fallacy of Suppressed Evidence is in advertising. Most marketing campaigns will present great information about a product, but will also ignore problematic or bad information. 3. When you get digital cable, you can watch different channels on every set in the house without purchasing expensive extra equipment. But with satellite TV, you have to buy an extra piece of equipment to each set. Therefore, digital cable is a better value. All of the above premises are true and do lead to the conclusion. But what they fail to note is the fact that if you are a single person – the sort of person who often seems to be the subject of the ads, curiously enough – there is little or no need to have independent cable on more than one TV. Because this information is ignored, the above argument commits the fallacy of Suppressed Evidence. We also sometimes see this fallacy committed in scientific research whenever someone focuses on evidence which supports their hypothesis while ignoring data which would tend to disconfirm it. This is why it is important that experiments can be replicated by others and that the information about how the experiments were conducted be released. Other researchers might catch the data which was originally ignored.