※ [本文转录自 TheRock 信箱] 作者: finavir (手机文化研究中) 标题: [补充]关於『稻草人』言论 时间: Tue Feb 20 01:13:24 2007 不好意思， 能不能麻烦你再把这篇转translator板上？ 谢谢。 我发现既然你和egghead都有把『稻草人﹝straw man﹞』谬误的 定义弄错，想来那并不是一个一般常用的字眼，所以我还是解释 一下比较好。 *** *** *** 关於『稻草人谬误﹝straw man fallacy﹞』， 我所能找到的最好的中文解释在西洋哲学板﹝W-Philosophy﹞上， 进板画面的板规第三条； 『所谓理性原则是指，想清楚自己要说，确定自己的原则、立场； 同样地，弄清楚别人的原则、立场，务必要达成有交集的讨论。 另外，也千万避免稻草人的谬误，也就是说，批评别人之前要 先知道别人在谈什麽，免得你所批评的根本不是对方所说的。』 至於用我自己的话来解释的话、以及为什麽我认为『禁止稻草人』 应列入translator板板规之一： "Straw man" is a type of argument that employs logical fallacy based on misrepresentation/misinterpretation of an opponent's position. It's not about insult; not about intention; and not about provocation. "Straw man" argument can be found just by looking at the plain text. When someone is misrepresenting/misinterpreting what the opponent's saying, be it on purpose or due to carelessness, you can tell just by looking at the plain text. Putting a "no straw man" rule up front is to ask all the parties involved in a discussion to make sure that they understand their opponents' arguments before replying. The purpose of a "no straw man" rule here is to decrease conflicts, or at the very least, prevent conflicts from escalating. W-Philosophy forum has this rule, and it's pretty effective as far as I can tell. 为什麽我会说『稻草人』的破坏力之强、杀伤力之大？ 这从最近一次的笔战里就可以看得出来了吧。 『把别人根本就没有讲的东西硬套到那个别人头上』、『扭曲误释 别人的意思』类似这样的行为就是所谓的『稻草人谬误』。『稻草 人谬误』只会让争执越演越激烈。更何况，参与讨论的最起码尊重 就是要弄清楚别人的立场和原则吧。 毕竟，﹝至少就我看来﹞，目前正在制定的板规﹝因为还是草案， 所以我用现在进行式﹞，其用处主要不就是conflict prevention, management and resolution？ 而跟restitution或是torts并无多大干系。﹝ok，严格上来讲跟 torts是有些关系吧﹞ -- Because human beings don't really know what's going on, as a defense mechanism, they develop rigid belief. --

※ 发信站: 批踢踢实业坊(ptt.cc) ◆ From: 74.98.239.53 --

※ 发信站: 批踢踢实业坊(ptt.cc) ◆ From: 61.218.0.48