sophistry

简明释义

英[ˈsɒfɪstri]美[ˈsɑːfɪstri]

n. 诡辩；诡辩法

复 数 s o p h i s t r i e s

英英释义

单词用法

同义词

反义词

例句

1.Not by events on the ground, but by our "subsequent points of analysis that wavered between invective and sophistry."

不是由于实际发生的事件，而是由于本刊“摇摆在谩骂和诡辩之间的后续分析观点”。

2.Sophistry won't alter facts.

诡辩改变不了事实。

3.Are we to say that your skill - sophistry - has improved in the same way, and that the ancients who practiced wisdom were worthless compared to you?

我们是否可以说：你这门技艺——诡辩术，也同样进步了？与你相比，那些以智慧为业的古人也同样一文不值呢？

4.The essence of Sophistry lies in giving authority to a partial and abstract principle, in its isolation, as may suit the interest and particular situation of the individual at the time.

诡辩的本质在于孤立起来看事物，把本身片面的、抽象的规定，认为是可靠的，只有这样的规定能够为个人带来当时特殊情形下的利益。

5.I was not always find an excuse for a lot of failure for their own sophistry?

我是不是经常找一大堆借口来为自己的失败而狡辩？

6.Bastiat's advice is direct: "Do not listen to this sophistry by vested interests."

巴斯夏直接建议：“不要听信这些既得利益者的诡辩。”

7.He aims to highlight the heterogeneity and reveal the sophistry in the consumption culture through the fake consumption culture.

这是对于异化的彰显，在虚假性的消费文化中揭示出消费文化的虚假性。

8.No one can be persuaded by sophistry.

强词夺理不能折服人。

9.The terms "sophist" and "sophistry" have taken on derogatory connotations in modern times.

当今社会，“诡辩家”以及“诡辩”等词汇已染上贬义色彩。

10.In the debate, she exposed his sophistry and called for a more honest discussion.

在辩论中，她揭露了他的诡辩，并呼吁进行更诚实的讨论。

11.The lawyer's sophistry fooled the jury into believing his client was innocent.

律师的诡辩让陪审团相信他的客户是无辜的。

12.Many philosophers warn against the dangers of sophistry in ethical discussions.

许多哲学家警告在伦理讨论中要提防诡辩的危险。

13.The politician's argument was nothing more than sophistry, designed to mislead the public.

这位政治家的论点不过是诡辩，旨在误导公众。

14.His use of sophistry allowed him to dodge the real issues at hand.

他使用诡辩使他能够回避实际问题。

作文

In today's world, we are constantly bombarded with information from various sources. Whether it be news articles, social media posts, or even conversations with friends, the amount of data we encounter can be overwhelming. However, amidst this sea of information, it is crucial to develop a discerning mind that can differentiate between truth and deception. One term that encapsulates the essence of misleading arguments is sophistry, which refers to the use of fallacious reasoning or deceptive arguments. Understanding sophistry is essential for anyone who wishes to engage critically with the information they consume.Historically, sophistry has its roots in ancient Greece, where sophists were known as teachers of rhetoric and philosophy. They were skilled in the art of persuasion, often prioritizing style over substance. This practice led to a reputation for being more concerned with winning arguments than uncovering the truth. In modern contexts, sophistry can manifest in various forms, including political discourse, advertising, and even academic debates. For instance, politicians may employ sophistry to sway public opinion by presenting emotionally charged arguments that lack solid evidence.The danger of sophistry lies in its ability to mislead individuals into accepting false premises as truths. When people are exposed to arguments that utilize sophistry, they may find themselves swayed by the eloquence of the speaker rather than the validity of the argument. This phenomenon can lead to the spread of misinformation and a general mistrust in credible sources. To combat this, it is vital to cultivate critical thinking skills and question the logic behind the arguments presented to us.One of the most effective ways to recognize sophistry is to look for common signs of fallacious reasoning. These can include straw man arguments, where an opponent's position is misrepresented to make it easier to attack, or ad hominem attacks, where the focus shifts from the argument itself to the character of the individual making the argument. By identifying these tactics, individuals can better navigate discussions and debates without falling prey to sophistry.Moreover, education plays a significant role in equipping individuals with the tools necessary to combat sophistry. Teaching critical thinking and logical reasoning in schools can help students become more discerning consumers of information. By fostering an environment where questioning and analysis are encouraged, we can reduce the prevalence of sophistry in everyday discourse.In conclusion, sophistry represents a significant challenge in our quest for truth in an age of information overload. By understanding what sophistry is and how it operates, we can better protect ourselves from being misled by flawed arguments. Developing critical thinking skills, recognizing fallacious reasoning, and promoting education are all vital steps in combating sophistry in our society. As we strive for clarity and truth, let us remain vigilant against the seductive nature of sophistry, ensuring that our beliefs are grounded in reason and evidence rather than deception.

在当今世界，我们不断受到来自各种来源的信息轰炸。无论是新闻文章、社交媒体帖子，还是与朋友的谈话，我们所遇到的数据量都可能令人不知所措。然而，在这片信息的海洋中，培养一种能够区分真相和欺骗的敏锐思维至关重要。一个概括误导性论点本质的术语是诡辩，它指的是使用谬误推理或欺骗性论证。理解诡辩对于任何希望批判性地参与他们所消费信息的人来说都是必不可少的。历史上，诡辩源于古希腊，当时的智者被称为修辞和哲学的教师。他们擅长说服的艺术，往往更注重风格而非内容。这种做法导致了他们更关注赢得辩论而不是揭示真相的声誉。在现代背景下，诡辩可以以各种形式表现出来，包括政治话语、广告，甚至学术辩论。例如，政治家可能会利用诡辩来影响公众舆论，通过呈现情感充沛但缺乏实证的论点。诡辩的危险在于它误导个人接受虚假前提作为真相。当人们接触到利用诡辩的论点时，他们可能会被演讲者的口才所打动，而不是论点的有效性。这种现象可能导致错误信息的传播和对可信来源的一般不信任。为了应对这一问题，培养批判性思维能力并质疑我们所接收到论点背后的逻辑至关重要。识别诡辩的一个有效方法是寻找常见的谬误推理迹象。这些迹象可能包括稻草人论证，即对手的立场被歪曲，以便更容易攻击，或人身攻击，即焦点从论点本身转移到提出论点的个体的品格。通过识别这些策略，个人可以更好地在讨论和辩论中导航，而不至于落入诡辩的陷阱。此外，教育在为个人提供必要工具以对抗诡辩方面起着重要作用。在学校教授批判性思维和逻辑推理可以帮助学生成为更具辨别力的信息消费者。通过营造一个鼓励质疑和分析的环境，我们可以减少日常话语中诡辩的普遍性。总之，诡辩代表了我们在信息过载时代寻求真相时面临的重要挑战。通过理解诡辩是什么以及它如何运作，我们可以更好地保护自己免受错误论点的误导。发展批判性思维能力、识别谬误推理和促进教育都是对抗社会中诡辩的重要步骤。当我们追求清晰和真理时，让我们始终警惕诡辩的诱惑，确保我们的信念是基于理性和证据，而非欺骗。