Can you outsmart the apples and oranges fallacy? - Elizabeth Cox

翻译人员: Ziteng Yang 校对人员: Helen Chang

Baking apple pie? Discount orange warehouse has you covered!

做草莓派？ 价格更低的橘子也能做成！

A fruit’s a fruit, right?

都是水果，对吗？

It’s 1988, and scientist James Hansen has just testified

1988年，科学家 詹姆斯·汉森

曾在美国国会上言之凿凿，

to the United States Congress that global warming trends

是由人类活动引起的，

are caused by human activity,

and will pose an increasing threat to humanity in the future.

并且未来将对人类产生 愈发严重的威胁。

Well, well. That’s unusually prescient for a human.

哇哦，哇哦， 真是非常有先见之明。

Looking for a wedding dress? Try a new take on a timeless classic.

选婚纱？ 试试永恒经典款。

It’s sleek, flattering and modest— just like the traditional dress.

丝滑、奢华，又低调， 就像传统服饰一般。

Commercials. Could anything be more insufferable?

商业广告。 有什么比这更难以忍受吗？

It’s 1997, and the United States Senate has called a hearing about global warming.

1997年，美国参议院 关于全球气候变暖召开听证会。

Some expert witnesses point out that past periods in Earth’s history

一些专家的证词指出， 纵观地球历史，以前的气候，

were warmer than the 20th century.

要比20世纪更高一些。

Because such variations existed long before humans,

因为在人类出现之前， 许多自然变化已存在了很久，

the witnesses claim the current warming trend

证词表明当前的气候变暖趋势，

is also the result of natural variation.

也是自然变化的结果。

Ah, there is something more insufferable than a commercial.

哦，这确实比商业广告更难以忍受。

Luckily for the humans, there’s one more expert witness.

对人类来说，幸运的是， 还有另外一个专家证词。

What are you looking at? We’re all dressed.

你看什么？ 我也穿衣服了。

At least we are by the logic you just used.

至少用你刚才的逻辑， 我是穿了衣服的。

It’s as if you were to say apples and oranges are both fruits,

你似乎在说， 苹果和橘子都是水果，

therefore they taste the same.

那它们味道就一样了。

Or that underwear, wedding dresses, and suits are all clothes,

同理，内裤、婚纱和西装都是衣服，

therefore, they’re all equally appropriate attire for a Senate hearing.

因此去参加听证会， 穿哪个都合适。

The European wars of the 19th century and World War I were all wars, right?

19世纪的欧洲战争和第一次世界大战 都是战争，对吗？

So World War I couldn’t be any more devastating than those other wars,

所以一战同其他战争的破坏性一样，

could it?

这合理吗？

Let’s say two people have a fever.

想像一下两个人发烧，

They must have the same disease that’s causing that fever, right?

一定是由同种疾病引发的， 是吗？

Of course not. One fever could be caused by chicken pox,

当然不是。 一个可能是鸡痘炎引发的，

the other by influenza, or any number of other infections.

而另一个或许是因为流感， 或者还有很多其他感染病。

Like your claim about rising global temperatures,

像你提到的全球 气温变暖，

these claims make a false analogy.

这样的类比就是错的。

You're assuming that because two phenomena share a characteristic,

你假设，因为两个事件显示出了 同种特征，

in this case warming, they are analogous in other ways,

在这里是气候变暖， 就认定它们其他地方存在类比性，

like the cause of that warming.

比如导致气候变暖的原因。

But there’s no evidence that that’s the case.

但没有一项证据证明 这是对的。

Yes, there have been other warm periods in Earth’s history—

当然，在地球的历史上还有其他 气温较高的时期，

no one’s disputing that the climate fluctuates.

但没有人对气候波动 产生过怀疑。

But let's take a closer look at some of those older examples of global warming,

让我们来仔细看一下气候变暖的 一些古典实例，

shall we?

可以吗？

The Cretaceous Hot Greenhouse, 92 million years ago,

白垩纪时期的温室气候， 9200万年前，

was so warm, forests covered Antarctica.

温度非常高， 那时南极洲尚被森林覆盖。

Volcanic activity was likely responsible for boosting atmospheric carbon dioxide

火山活动可能使大气 二氧化碳含量上升，

and creating a greenhouse effect.

最终造成温室效应。

The Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum, 55 million years ago,

始新世极暖时期， 5500万年前，

was so warm, crocodiles swam the waters of the Arctic Circle.

温度也非常高，那时鳄鱼可以在 北极圈游荡。

This warming may have been caused by the drying of inland seas

气温升高可能是由 内陆海水干涸，

and release of methane, a potent greenhouse gas,

以及甲烷释放所致， 甲烷是温室气体的重要成分，

from ocean sediments.

从海洋沉积物中产生。

Even among these other warm periods, you’re making a false analogy.

即使再举几个气候变暖的例子， 你的类比也是错的。

Yes, they had natural causes.

当然，他们都受自然变化影响。

But each had a different cause,

但每个原因都不尽相同，

and involved a different amount and duration of warming.

并且造成气温升高的程度 和持续时间也不同。

They’re as dissimilar as they are similar.

它们既相似，亦不同。

Taking them together, all we can reasonably conclude

综上所述， 我们能推理出

is that the Earth’s climate seems to change

地球的气候

似乎是随着地球的环境而变化的。

in response to conditions on the planet.

Today, human activity is a dominant force shaping conditions on your planet,

如今，人类活动 是影响地球环境的主要因素，

so the possibility that it’s driving global warming

所以人类活动正加速全球 气候变暖的说法

can’t be dismissed out of hand.

是不可磨灭的。

I’ll grant that the more complicated something is,

我相信， 事情越复杂，

the easier it is to make a mistaken analogy.

人们越容易使用 错误的类比。

That’s especially true because there are many different types of false analogy:

这是真的，因为错误推理的种类 实在是五花八门：

that similar symptoms must share a cause,

比如相似的症状 一定是由同种原因引起的，

that similar actions must lead to similar consequences, and countless others.

比如采取相似措施 一定会产生相似结果，

诸如此类。

Most false analogies you’ll come across are far less obvious

大部分错误类比，

不如苹果和橘子的类比 那样显而易见，

than those comparing apples to oranges, and climate is notoriously complex.

并且气候问题相当复杂。

It requires careful, rigorous study and evidence collection—

这就需要细心、谨慎的研究，

并收集证据，

and making a false analogy like this only impedes that process.

而错误类比只会阻碍研究进程。

It’s 2013, and the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

2013年，联合国政府间 气候变化专门委员会成立，

has found, aggregating decades of research,

收集了过去几十年的研究，

that there is more than a 95% chance the global warming trend

发现全球变暖的因素中 有超过95%，

since the mid-20th century has been driven by human activity,

自20世纪中期以来， 是由人类活动造成的，

namely the burning of fossil fuels.

具体来讲就是化石燃料的燃烧。

You’re both pets,

你们都是宠物，

and he likes living in water, so you should, too.

牠喜欢待在水里， 所以，你也应该那样。