逻辑谬误

那种认为只有数学才能使经济学成为科学乃至硬科学的观点，是犯了诉诸权威的逻辑谬误。

The opinion that believes only using mathematics can economics be a science or a hard science is under the lead of logical fallacy of appealing to authority .

本段论述至少犯下了四个关键性的逻辑谬误。

This argument suffers from at least four critical fallacies .

这一论述犯有若干关键性的逻辑谬误。

This argument suffers from several critical fallacies .

其相同点是墨家和亚氏都分析了思维形式方面的谬误、都重视对语言和违反矛盾律所犯逻辑谬误的分析。

The similarity is that they have both analyzed the errors in thinking forms and paid great attention to the analysis of logic errors in speech .

可以认为，第一类错误由检验中的实际推断原理引起，第二类错误由检验中的逻辑谬误引起。

It is to be proposed that the first type of mistake is caused in testing by certain principles of inference and the second type is caused in testing by logical errors .

每一个组成部分都包含若干方面，如区分不同论点、评价论据、识别煽情和逻辑谬误、表达个人观点等等。

Each component embraces several facets , such as distinguishing among opposing viewpoints , explaining figurative language , assessing arguments , recognizing appeals and logical fallacies , and expressing a personal viewpoint .

墨家逻辑的谬误论

On the fallacy theory of Mohist school 's logic

西方传统逻辑讲谬误，主要指形式谬误；中国古代逻辑讲谬误，主要指实质谬误。

Fallacies refer to formal fallacies in the western logic theories while in ancient China factual ones .

他们全都吸收并加以引用的那信息，存在着逻辑上的谬误。

There are logical fallacies in the information they are all absorbing .

日语中的某些表现方法与常规的语、句法自相矛盾，甚至存在逻辑上的谬误，从而一直形成日语教学的一大盲点。

Some expressions , conventional words and the syntactical structures are contradictory . Sometimes there exist errors in the logic .

中国古代逻辑学者的逻辑谬误论

On the Opinions of Logic Falsehood of Ancient Chinese Logician

谨守逻辑形式并避免谬误可以说服别人，并给予司法判决正当性，维护法律的科学性和确定性。

Strictly abiding by the logical form and avoiding fallacies will be convincing , and will maintain legitimacy in judicial decisions , and will maintain the scientific nature and definiteness in law .

讨论了科学研究的成果&科学结论的逻辑问题，因为从特定的事例归纳到普遍的规律存在着归纳逻辑谬误，所以，在科学研究中特别要注意科学结论外推的局限性。

Logic of scientific conclusion is discussed in the paper : there is a limitation of extension of a scientific conclusion since there is a " falsehood of inductive logic " from the special objects to a common law .