Talk:草人謬論
Things are said to be named 'equivocally' when, though they have
a common name, the definition corresponding with the name differs for each. Thus, a real man and a figure in a picture can both lay claim to the name 'animal'; yet these are equivocally so named, for, though they have a common name, the definition corresponding with the name differs for each. For should any one define in what sense each is an animal, his definition in the one case will be
appropriate to that case only.
有乜唔同？* -- :-) Hillgentleman | 書 | 二零零七年七月二十四號（星期二）格林尼治 03時13分37秒。
@WikiCantona、Deryck Chan、S7w4j9、Shinjiman、William915、Kowlooner、HenryLi：
@Cedric tsan cantonais、Helpcanbepowerful、昏君、广州阿沾、SC96、PQ77wd、Roy17：
查實我覺得呢篇都可以試吓做好文。恐狼博士 (傾偈) 2018年9月4號 (二) 00:55 (UTC)
- 咁其實「偷換概念」同「草人謬論」係咪同一樣嘢？同埋個「草」使唔使講明係「稻草人」？好少聽「草人」呢個無咗個「稻」字嘅講法，無論講個農業用具定係邏輯謬論都係。 翹仔 (傾偈) 2018年9月4號 (二) 09:24 (UTC)
- @Deryck Chan： 係咩？我聽過廣東話有人嗌做「草人」... 不如大家投個票啦。恐狼博士 (傾偈) 2018年11月5號 (一) 04:58 (UTC)
- 你聽過就信你啦。翹仔 (傾偈) 2018年11月5號 (一) 10:47 (UTC)
- 想問下@Dr. Greywolf：之前 User:Deryck Chan 問過，「偷換概念」。其實係「概念無限量延伸」，例子講，唔信上帝，就打家劫舍殺人放火都得。有人會覺得「唔信上帝」就係「冇道德底線」，亦即係乜嘢都做得。「謬論」就係呢啲延伸係「唔啦更」。
The typical straw man argument creates the illusion of having completely refuted or defeated an opponent's proposition through the covert replacement of it with a different proposition.
- 可以講多少少呢？--WikiCantona (傾偈) 2021年8月23號 (一) 07:40 (UTC)
對外連結有變 (2023年10月)
[編輯]各位編輯仝人：
我啱啱救返草人謬論上面嘅 1 個對外連結。麻煩檢查下我改嘅嘢。有咩查詢，或者想隻機械人唔理啲外連，或者想隻機械人成版唔好掂，請睇呢版簡明嘅問答頁。我改咗呢啲外連：
- 加咗存檔 https://web.archive.org/web/20181011180615/http://www.softschools.com/timelines/evolution_theory_timeline/98/ 落 http://www.softschools.com/timelines/evolution_theory_timeline/98/
如果隻機械人有錯，請睇問答頁嘅指示。
唔該晒！—InternetArchiveBot (報告軟件缺陷) 2023年10月21號 (六) 11:27 (UTC)