iamgood2

D 火牛唔夠火係直接起火 咁危

Answer

其實你有冇睇？佢話加上'電源功率不足'先會導致爆炸，睇曬全部先話人啦
記者斷章取義，你又 ...
core2duo 發表於 2016-5-1 04:17

    Source: http://www.iep.utm.edu/fallacy/#SlipperySlope

Slippery Slope

Suppose someone claims that a first step (in a chain of causes and effects, or a chain of reasoning) will probably lead to a second step that in turn will probably lead to another step and so on until a final step ends in trouble. If the likelihood of the trouble occurring is exaggerated, the Slippery Slope Fallacy is present.

See above but I agree slippery slope can be used to state the starting point must lead to the ending point.

On the other hand, can you point out where did I said the original author has slippery slope argument? I think it is clear that I directly quoted your argument. Seems you are the one who "斷章取義"

Also, you said it is about "可行性行徑" and assume it is true for a second, you are still avoiding the question about the probability of the starting point "裝多左軟件" leads to the ending point "爆炸".

core2duo

Source:


See above but I agree slippery slope can be used to state the starting point must  ...
Answer 發表於 2016-5-1 14:53

Suppose someone claims that a first step (in a chain of causes and effects, or a chain of reasoning) will probably lead to a second step that in turn will probably lead to another step and so on until a final step ends in trouble. If the likelihood of the trouble occurring is exaggerated, the Slippery Slope Fallacy is present.

probably≠possibly交換概念
同埋呢，slippery slope系用來說明從A→.....→B太多不確定因素，不能證明:There is no chance of A →......→ B

裝多左軟件→自動啟動既多左(你唔可以assume人人識disable開機啟動)→增加電腦功耗→再加上變壓器輸出不足→變壓器功率＜系統功率→變壓器過熱→物料溶解→短路→燃燒→爆炸

有冇睇，定系只是睇箭頭？
咩叫做再加上？唔識中文？

core2duo

Also, you said it is about "可行性行徑" and assume it is true for a second, you are still avoiding the question about the probability of the starting point "裝多左軟件" leads to the ending point "爆炸"
Answer 發表於 2016-5-1 14:53

你選擇性忽略再加上變壓器輸出不足呢個條件呢，立論落去都係曬Gas

core2duo

Source:


See above but I agree slippery slope can be used to state the starting point must  ...
Answer 發表於 2016-5-1 14:53

問你三個問題
1)裝多左軟件在沒有禁止自動啟動的情況下有沒有機會增加電腦功耗？
2)在電源功率不足的情況下有沒有機會導致過熱爆炸？
3)在電源功率不足情況下增加電腦功耗有沒有機會導致爆炸？
唔洗講咁多，Yes or No問題
如果你咁都睇唔明，講乜鬼Fallacy姐

Answer

probably≠possibly交換概念
同埋呢，slippery slope系用來說明從A→.....→B太多不確定因素，不 ...
core2duo 發表於 2016-5-1 21:03

    haha, it is just a definition to show it is not necessarily "必然" as you said, not saying probably = possible, don't 斷章取義

in case you selectively ignore my reply, I also mentioned that slippery slope can be applied to arguments where starting point must lead to ending point.

Answer

你選擇性忽略再加上變壓器輸出不足呢個條件呢，立論落去都係曬Gas
core2duo 發表於 2016-5-1 21:25

    what makes you think I'm ignore this statement but not other statements like 自動啟動既多左, 增加電腦功耗, etc? psychosis?

my question is what is the probability that the starting point "裝多左軟件" leads to the ending point "爆炸" through your whole chain of statements? (assuming it is "可行性行徑" as you said)

裝多左軟件→自動啟動既多左(你唔可以assume人人識disable開機啟動)→增加電腦功耗→再加上變壓器輸出不足→變壓器功率＜系統功率→變壓器過熱→物料溶解→短路→燃燒→爆炸

it seems you're either avoiding the question or you're an illiterate

Answer

問你三個問題
1)裝多左軟件在沒有禁止自動啟動的情況下有沒有機會增加電腦功耗？
2)在電源功率不足的情況 ...
core2duo 發表於 2016-5-1 21:30

    I pointed out your fallacy and now you started sidetracking, a typical tactic of internet troll.
It simply does not make sense to discuss some argument which is a fallacy

core2duo

what makes you think I'm ignore this statement but not other statements like 自動啟動既多左,  ...
Answer 發表於 2016-5-2 03:02

我的說法是：裝多左軟件+電源功率不足有機會導致爆炸
我並非說單一裝多左軟件有機會導致爆炸，成日想set個陷阱比人踩
所以你的問題系冇意義

core2duo

I pointed out your fallacy and now you started sidetracking, a typical tactic of internet tro ...
Answer 發表於 2016-5-2 03:17

你先了解下Fallacy系點用先算！