Item 1:
The man drinks number 1, then he is strong, clever and agile
The other who doesn't drink number 1 is not.
The commercial advert has structure fallacy:
If A then B
Not A Therefore, not B
The right structure:
If A then B
Not B
Therefore, not A
Source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0xhYyYN2wKk
Item 2:
Gieo một quẻ bói lấy chồng lợi chăng?
Thầy bói gieo quẻ nói rằng
Lợi thì có lợi nhưng răng chẳng còn.
=> Fallacies of ambiguity.
Analysis:
In this poem, the fortune-teller misunderstand the meaning of the word "lợi" which the elder lady says. She means benefits, advantages of marriage but he supposes that it means the gum- the firm areas of flesh in the mouth to which the teeth are attached.
Source: http://www.cadaotucngu.com/diendan/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=205
Item 3:
Analysis:
In this advertisement, they have to conclusion that they have done a good job that they have changed the careers of 600,000 managers which actually is a small number of the total managers of India.
This poster has hasty generalization:
A is taken from the population of B
-> C is made by B from A.
A- 600,000 managers.
B- the total number of managers in India.
C- Naukri has done a good job.
Source: https://mail-attachment.googleusercontent.com/attachment/?ui=2&ik=a2418d97b1&view=att&th=136d5539d53c8278&attid=0.1&disp=inline&realattid=f_h1arkwq80&safe=1&zw&saduie=AG9B_P-G-AOq3W61janhqhvjon43&sadet=1335018919440&sads=zNaoq3xsbZQX753gAbgWTxdd88M&sadssc=1
- in the first item:
ReplyDeleteI think you should make the argument structure clearer.I suggest it could be:
1. drinking number 1, then becoming stronger,more clever and agiler.
2. not drinking number 1
-----------------------------------
--> less strong, clever, agile.
- In item 3: basing on only the poster you posted, I think the fallacy cannot be hasty generalization. Acctually, In my opinion, there is no fallacy in this item.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteHI there, I think in your item 2, it's not a fallacy but a pun. The "authors" just played on words by means of homonym. Therefore, it is not fallacy of ambiguity.
ReplyDeleteIn your item 3, it is a vague claim in which "change" is confusing. This ad says "change" but how that change is. It can be either positive or negative one. Then, this ad contains fallacy of ambiguity, I suppose.