非正式推理谬误:从决策角度来看,已回答和未回答的问题

Lucie Vrbová, B. Müllerová
{"title":"非正式推理谬误:从决策角度来看,已回答和未回答的问题","authors":"Lucie Vrbová, B. Müllerová","doi":"10.1504/ijmdm.2021.10032675","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Informal reasoning fallacies are unfair deceptive ways of persuading somebody of a particular argument or point of view that is not valid or plausible. Although previous research has shed light on some aspects of argumentative flaws, the knowledge of fallacious reasoning principles is still insufficient, raising questions critical to the informed decision-making process. The present paper gives an overview of the findings for the following questions: first, are informal reasoning fallacies rare? Second, are people able to identify fallacious reasoning? And third, is the ability to identify fallacious reasoning sufficient to prevent their effect? Occurring in various situations from politics through healthcare to advertising and everyday life, fallacious reasoning remains a challenge for both cultivating the ability to identify misleading arguments and further research into this issue.","PeriodicalId":35475,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Management and Decision Making","volume":"20 1","pages":"112"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Informal reasoning fallacies: answered and unanswered questions from a decision making perspective\",\"authors\":\"Lucie Vrbová, B. Müllerová\",\"doi\":\"10.1504/ijmdm.2021.10032675\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Informal reasoning fallacies are unfair deceptive ways of persuading somebody of a particular argument or point of view that is not valid or plausible. Although previous research has shed light on some aspects of argumentative flaws, the knowledge of fallacious reasoning principles is still insufficient, raising questions critical to the informed decision-making process. The present paper gives an overview of the findings for the following questions: first, are informal reasoning fallacies rare? Second, are people able to identify fallacious reasoning? And third, is the ability to identify fallacious reasoning sufficient to prevent their effect? Occurring in various situations from politics through healthcare to advertising and everyday life, fallacious reasoning remains a challenge for both cultivating the ability to identify misleading arguments and further research into this issue.\",\"PeriodicalId\":35475,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Management and Decision Making\",\"volume\":\"20 1\",\"pages\":\"112\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Management and Decision Making\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1504/ijmdm.2021.10032675\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Decision Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Management and Decision Making","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1504/ijmdm.2021.10032675","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Decision Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

非正式推理谬误是一种不公平的欺骗方式,用来说服某人接受不成立或不可信的特定论点或观点。尽管先前的研究已经阐明了论证缺陷的某些方面,但对谬误推理原则的了解仍然不足,这对明智的决策过程提出了关键问题。本文概述了以下问题的研究结果:首先,非正式推理谬误罕见吗?第二,人们能够识别错误的推理吗?第三,识别错误推理的能力是否足以防止其影响?从政治到医疗保健,再到广告和日常生活,谬误推理在各种情况下都存在,对于培养识别误导性论点的能力和进一步研究这一问题来说,谬误推理仍然是一个挑战。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Informal reasoning fallacies: answered and unanswered questions from a decision making perspective
Informal reasoning fallacies are unfair deceptive ways of persuading somebody of a particular argument or point of view that is not valid or plausible. Although previous research has shed light on some aspects of argumentative flaws, the knowledge of fallacious reasoning principles is still insufficient, raising questions critical to the informed decision-making process. The present paper gives an overview of the findings for the following questions: first, are informal reasoning fallacies rare? Second, are people able to identify fallacious reasoning? And third, is the ability to identify fallacious reasoning sufficient to prevent their effect? Occurring in various situations from politics through healthcare to advertising and everyday life, fallacious reasoning remains a challenge for both cultivating the ability to identify misleading arguments and further research into this issue.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
International Journal of Management and Decision Making
International Journal of Management and Decision Making Decision Sciences-Decision Sciences (all)
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
39
期刊介绍: The general themes of the IJMDM seek to develop our understanding of organisational decision making and the technology used to support the decision process. A particular purpose is to consider management processes in international and cross-cultural contexts and to secure international inputs and comparisons. The IJMDM aims to provide a new venue for high quality papers focusing on the analytical and empirical study of management processes in private and public sector organisations - including cases and action research.
期刊最新文献
A hierarchical structure model for blockchain technology adoption Digital Business Case: Scientific Contributions for a digital framework from Benefits Realization Management Applying SWARA Approach and Refined Kano Model to Classify and Rank Customer Requirements, Case study: Automotive industry in Portugal Employee stress management and well-being while working from home during the pandemic: The role of involvement HRM practices, self-efficacy and hope Examining work from home practices during the COVID-19 pandemic in Singapore: Predictors of motivation and productivity
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1