fallacy of composition

简明释义

合成谬误

英英释义

例句

1.Just because a few students in a class perform well doesn't mean the entire class will excel; this is a classic fallacy of composition.

仅仅因为班里有几个学生表现优秀，并不意味着整个班级都会出色；这就是一个经典的整体谬误。

2.The belief that if every individual saves money, the economy will improve is a fallacy of composition.

认为如果每个人都存钱，经济就会改善，这是一种整体谬误。

3.Claiming that all members of a group are intelligent because some are is a fallacy of composition.

声称一个群体的所有成员都是聪明的，因为其中一些人聪明，这是一种整体谬误。

4.Assuming that a team will win just because its star player is exceptional is a fallacy of composition.

假设一支球队会赢，仅仅因为它的明星球员表现出色，这就是一个整体谬误。

5.The argument that if one person can succeed in investing, then everyone can is an example of the fallacy of composition.

如果一个人可以在投资中成功，那么每个人都可以成功的论点是一个整体谬误的例子。

作文

The concept of the fallacy of composition refers to the logical error that occurs when one assumes that what is true for an individual part must also be true for the whole. This fallacy can often lead to misguided conclusions and misunderstanding in various fields, including economics, sociology, and everyday reasoning. To illustrate this, consider a simple example from economics: if one person saves money, it may benefit them individually, but if everyone in an economy decides to save simultaneously, it can lead to a decrease in overall demand, resulting in economic downturns. This is a classic case of the fallacy of composition where the assumption that individual actions will yield the same results on a larger scale is flawed.In our daily lives, we often encounter the fallacy of composition without realizing it. For instance, a student might believe that because they study hard and achieve good grades, all students who study hard will also achieve similar success. However, this overlooks various factors such as individual learning styles, personal circumstances, and external influences that can affect academic performance. By assuming that the success of one applies universally, the student falls into the trap of the fallacy of composition.The implications of this fallacy extend beyond individual reasoning and can impact societal decisions. Policymakers may assume that what works for a small community will work for a larger population, leading to ineffective or harmful policies. For example, a health initiative that proves successful in a small town may not yield the same results in a large city due to differences in demographics, resources, and infrastructure. Here again, the fallacy of composition comes into play, as the policymakers fail to recognize the complexities of scaling solutions.Understanding the fallacy of composition is crucial for critical thinking and effective decision-making. It encourages individuals to question generalizations and seek evidence before drawing conclusions. Recognizing that the properties of parts do not necessarily apply to the whole can help prevent errors in judgment and promote a more nuanced understanding of complex systems.Moreover, in the context of teamwork and collaboration, the fallacy of composition can lead to misunderstandings about group dynamics. For instance, a manager might assume that because one team member excels in communication, the entire team will communicate effectively. This assumption can overlook the diverse communication styles and challenges that may exist within the group. Acknowledging the fallacy of composition in this scenario allows for a more tailored approach to team management, fostering an environment where each member's strengths and weaknesses are recognized and addressed.In conclusion, the fallacy of composition serves as a reminder of the importance of careful reasoning and the dangers of overgeneralization. Whether in economics, education, policy-making, or interpersonal relationships, recognizing this fallacy can lead to better outcomes and a deeper understanding of the complexities involved in any situation. By questioning assumptions and seeking a comprehensive view, we can avoid the pitfalls associated with the fallacy of composition and make more informed decisions in our personal and professional lives.

“组成谬误”这一概念指的是一种逻辑错误，即当人们假设个别部分的真实情况也必然适用于整体时所发生的错误。这种谬误常常导致在各个领域（包括经济学、社会学和日常推理）中产生误导性的结论和误解。为了说明这一点，可以考虑一个来自经济学的简单例子：如果一个人存钱，这可能对他们个人有益，但如果经济中的每个人都同时选择储蓄，这可能会导致整体需求下降，从而引发经济衰退。这是一个经典的“组成谬误”案例，假设个体行为在更大范围内会产生相同结果的想法是有缺陷的。在我们的日常生活中，我们常常在不知情的情况下遇到“组成谬误”。例如，一名学生可能认为，因为他们努力学习并取得了好成绩，所以所有努力学习的学生也会取得类似的成功。然而，这忽视了个人学习风格、个人情况和外部影响等各种因素，这些因素都会影响学业表现。通过假设一个人的成功是普遍适用的，这名学生陷入了“组成谬误”的陷阱。这种谬误的影响不仅限于个人推理，还可能影响社会决策。政策制定者可能假设在一个小社区有效的措施在更大的人口中也会有效，从而导致无效或有害的政策。例如，在一个小镇上证明成功的健康倡议，可能由于人口统计、资源和基础设施的差异而在大城市中无法产生相同的效果。在这里，“组成谬误”再次发挥作用，因为政策制定者未能认识到扩展解决方案的复杂性。理解“组成谬误”对于批判性思维和有效决策至关重要。它鼓励个人质疑泛化，并在得出结论之前寻求证据。认识到部分的属性并不一定适用于整体，可以帮助防止判断错误，并促进对复杂系统的更细致理解。此外，在团队合作与协作的背景下，“组成谬误”可能导致对团队动态的误解。例如，经理可能假设，因为一名团队成员在沟通方面表现出色，所以整个团队都会有效沟通。这一假设可能忽视团队内部可能存在的多样化沟通风格和挑战。在这种情况下承认“组成谬误”，可以促使采取更具针对性的团队管理方法，营造一个承认并解决每个成员的优势和劣势的环境。总之，“组成谬误”提醒我们注意谨慎推理的重要性和过度概括的危险。无论是在经济学、教育、政策制定还是人际关系中，认识到这种谬误都可以导致更好的结果，并更深入地理解任何情况所涉及的复杂性。通过质疑假设并寻求全面的视角，我们可以避免与“组成谬误”相关的陷阱，并在个人和职业生活中做出更明智的决策。