(Intro music)
[开场音乐]
Hello, I’m Paul Henne
大家好 我是Paul Henne
and I’m a philosophy graduate student at Duke University.
一名来自杜克大学的哲学研究生
And in this video I’m gonna talk to you
在本视频中 我们会讲到
about a particular informal fallacy called
一种特殊的非形式谬误
the fallacy of composition.
即合成谬误
In doing this, I’m also gonna tell you
为此 我们也会聊一聊
why there aren’t colorless cats.
为什么不存在无色的猫
But I’ll get to that idea in a second.
但这个问题要过会儿才会讲到
To recall an informal fallacy is an argument
可以这么说 非形式谬误
whose premises do not support its conclusion.
是一种条件无法支持结论的论证
Generally, a fallacy is a defect in the reasoning.
通常讲 谬误就是推理中的缺陷
And there are two types of fallacies:
谬误有两种：
formal and informal.
形式的和非形式的
A formal fallacy is an argument
形式谬误
with an error in the form of the argument,
就是形式出错的论证
and an informal fallacy contains
而非形式谬误
an error in the content of the argument.
是内容出错的论证
You can learn more about this distinction
关于二者的区别
in the video about informal and formal fallacies,
你可以在之后的视频中
which should be out soon.
进行深度学习
For this video, we’re going to focus on
而在本视频中 我们将重点关注
a particular informal fallacy.
一种特殊的非形式谬误
So, the fallacy of composition is an error in reasoning
合成谬误是
that arises in the content of an argument.
在论证内容上产生的推理错误
We’ll commit this error
如果没有合适的理由
when we draw conclusions about the whole
就从部分的事实中
from truths about its constituent parts without
得出整体的结论
without having a justification for doing so.
我们就会出现这样的错误
That is, they think
也就是说 他们认为
without justification that what is true of the parts of something
部分正确 可以毫无异议地推导出
must also be true of the whole those parts compose.
部分所属于的整体是正确的
Sounds problematic, right?
听起来很有问题 对吧
But let’s represent this logical error more formally.
我们用更正式的方式来展现这个逻辑错误
The reasoning would be something like this.
会得到类似这样的结论
Premise one: The parts of whole A have qualities X, Y, and Z.
条件一：A的某些部分具有特点X Y Z
Conclusion one: Therefore, whole A must have qualities X, Y, and Z.
结论一：整个A一定有特点X Y Z
The argument seems attractive,
这种论证看起来很有吸引力
but the style of argument is like saying that
但它的论证方法看起来就好像是
because the states have some set of qualities,
因为某些州具有一些特点
then the entire nation must have those qualities.
整个合众国就也会具有这些特点
You may now be able to see what’s wrong with this line of reasoning.
现在 你大概知道错误在哪儿了
Without sufficient justification,
在没有充分理由时
we cannot infer that the whole has the same qualities
我们不能因为部分具有某种特点
as its parts simply because the parts have that quality.
就认为整体也具有这种特点
It may be the case that the whole lacks the qualities that the parts have.
当整体缺少局部的品质时就可能出现这种谬误
It’s like saying that because Arizona has an arid climate,
这就像在说 因为亚利桑那气候干燥
the entire nation has an arid climate too.
整个美国的气候便都是干燥的
Let’s look at a few more examples.
我们再看几个例子
It’s true that the number three and the number seven
数字3和7都是奇数
are both odd numbers.
这毫无疑问
We might say that three and seven
我们可以说
have the characteristic of being odd.
3和7都具有“奇数”这一特点
Each is also a part of the number ten.
而它们也是10的构成部分
Three plus seven equals ten.
3 + 7 = 10
But we cannot say that the number ten is odd
但我们不能因为3和7都是奇数
simply because its parts, three and seven, have that quality.
就判断10也是奇数
If we did, we would commit the fallacy of composition.
如果我们这样做了 我们就会犯合成谬误
Let’s try another example.
再来一个例子
Suppose your friend made this argument.
假设你的朋友做了这样的论证
Premise one: Atoms are colorless.
条件一：原子是无色的
Premise two: Cats, we know, are composed of a bunch of atoms.
条件二：猫是由原子构成
Conclusion: Therefore, cats are colorless too.
结论：猫是无色的
Well, we know that cats are not in fact colorless
我们知道猫不是无色的
but we can also see where this person made her error.
但是我们同样可以看到她在哪里犯了错误
Without justification, she assumed that the whole
没有充分理由 她便认为
has the same qualities as its parts.
部分和整体具有相同的特点
So even though the premises of her argument are true
所以 尽管论证条件都是对的
she committed the fallacy of composition.
她还是犯了合成谬误
So, we don’t have to worry about any colorless cats.
因此 我们不必担心猫是无色的
So, we just learned about the fallacy of composition,
我们刚刚学习了合成谬误
or the error in reasoning that comes about
或者说 如何指出那些
when one infers that the whole has the same qualities
认为整体具有局部的特点的人的
as its constituent parts.
错误之处
It is important, however, to know that this style of reasoning
然而 重要的是 你也要知道
doesn’t always lead to false conclusions.
这种推理方式并非总是得出错误的结论
You friend, for instance, might argue the following.
比如 你的朋友可能会这样与你争论
Premise one: Every part of my cat is composed of matter.
条件一 我的猫的每一部分都是由物质构成的
Conclusion: Therefore, my cat is composed of matter.
结论一 我的猫是由物质构成的
And her argument leads to a true conclusion.
她推导得到了正确的结论
The fallacy only arises
做这种谬误产生的条件仅仅是
when we don’t have a good reason to infer
我们没有足够理由认为
that the whole has the same qualities as its parts.
整体具有局部的特点
So, remember to stay vigilant of this fallacy
所以 记得要对此谬误保持警惕
and not to worry about any colorless cats.
而非担心存在没有颜色的猫