BLURDAZE

CRS is approaching, and some of my frens are going to be assessed for their critical reasoning skills... therefore.. yeah. let me revise my CRS here.
OH, any mistakes, tell me, i don't wanna phail my CRS T.T I am using names in some examples, forgive me if i entered your name by coincidence.

Let's start with something easy... what is circular reasoning? Also known as begging the question, it is called circular reasoning. Circular reasoning is circular reasoning, and hence, it is circular reasoning. Now you understand? if you don't understand, you don't understand because you don't understand. that's a circular reasoning/argument.

Slippery slope. Something like a slippery slope. you stand on a slippery slope, you may slide down, but you may not too. slippery slope happens when an argument assume a step which will trigger a series of event involuntarily. eg. if he stand on the slope, he will slip down, and he will get seriously injured. That means he will end up in the hospital, where he will pay medical bills which cost a bomb. yea.

False Dilemma. Eg. a false dilemma is like this: You either hate Fabian, or you love Fabian. you have only this 2 chioce. But clearly, we can have another choice, whereby you are NEUTRAL towards Fabian, or you can also, juz merely, like him. I think it's rather clear..

Ad Hominem. It means "against the man". E.g. Fabian will never be right about the taste of other drinks. After all, he only drinks coke and ginger ale. Clearly, this is attacking Fabian. sad sad sad.

Appeal to common practice. Eg. It's right to scold vulgarities, since the majority do it. This is an assumption, where just because most of the people do it, it becomes an evidence for supporting an action, which is OBVIOUSLY WRONG.

Strawman. As the term implies, strawman is a fallacy whereby a person attacks a "straw" form of the original argument. straw is much weaker than metal. example. Actual argument: The age limit for legal sex should be 16 instead of 18 (eg.) If you think that there should be no age limit for legal sex, you must be a paedophile. (do you get it? there's some link there, but it's just wrong, since it's distorted argument.)

Over-generalization. for instance, an argument here: I've got a bad result as my lecturer is NAME. therefore, NAME must be a bad lecturer. <<-- this is too generalised. it can be actually the student's (I) fault.

This is the end of the post. GOOD LUCK TO MY CLASSMATES TODAY~~~ ._. i hope i can score well. i suck rather much when everything comes down to English.