calvin's one week BCT diary

I think it is common when it comes to lunch and dinner time we have this question" where to eat? the common reply " where you want to go?" . The food debate goes on and on until a place is decide. Well I said lets go to the Indian Restaurant. One friend did not agree to go and he said " What the indian restaurant, are you crazy? That cook is so unhygienic , he scratches his leg before cooking, uses his unclean hand to cook, after eating you will feel sick,people will start to think your dirty because you eat dirty food, you will feel not confident with yourself, when your morale is low,you will feel sad,your sadness will cause you to be unwanted? Do want that to happen to you"?

What fallacy is this? If you say ad populum appeal to indirect consequences.
Congratulations. This is the use of indirect consequences by the speaker to persuade the listeners to agree with him/her.

Many people ask why our smaller neighbour Singapore with limited natural resources and area compared to Malaysia can be more advanced than us. Singapore strength comes from its human capital. With creativity and innovation Singapore has emerged as a tiger of South East Asia. Recently, I watched a programme on Singapore water technology.
The country has embarked on water technology since 1998, recyling waste water into drinkable water. Advancement in membrane technology has reduce the cost of recycling waste water and making the water ultra-clean and safe to drink.

Martin Luther (ML) on the verge of giving his most important speech in his life .Graduate with a master degree in mathematics from Cambridge,ML has been obsessed with Riemann Hypothesis ever since he saw this problem. Mathematician regards this conjecture as the most important unsolved problem in mathematics. ML announced his proof after a series of lecture he gave title " The Riemann's Partial Solution." A fellow colleague, Nick Gats has pointed out even though there is a proof ,it still needs to be verified by mathematician. Only 10 people are qualified to do so in the world.

After giving the last lecture, ML clearly felt relief . All he has to do now is correspond with his counterparts to verified that the proof is correct.

Does this word seems weird at first? what is Velcro? Velcro has been around for a long time. Its is an invention inspired by nature and invented by Swiss engineer, Eric Ugland. The story was one day after returning from a hunting trip with his dog in the Alps.
Eric took a close look at the burrs (seeds) of burdock that kept sticking to his clothes and his dog's fur. He proceeded to examine the seed of the burdock, he notice a hook-and-loop system that the seeds use to hitchhike on passing animals aiding seed dispersal.
Eric realized this system can be use to join things together. The result was Velcro.Application of Velcro can be seen in shoes,bags and many more.

It is always common to hear people say " I failed my exam because something something happen" . What really cause you to fail your exam- tiredness,laziness,stupidity or some superstitious believe. I overheard someone saying " I failed my exam because the broom touched my leg yesterday."

This person beliefs his/her bad luck caused his/her failure in the recent exam. I would say this is "post hoc fallacy" .In layman terms " A occur B occur". Associating bad luck with our misfortune is common way for people to explain their misfortune.But please do not use this type of sentence in your argument.

Hello boys and girls,

I was having a conversation with Miss Hanae Nakamura after class and realized I made lots of hasty generalization. Wow, i guess critical thinking really made me notice my own weaknesses. Anyway I made a comment saying " All Japanese people study engineering"after my sensei said she studied engineering.

Sounds vague and dubious right? This is called" hasty generalization". Hmm...this is a type of fallacy defined as drawing general conclusion from a sample that is biased or too small.

Big 2 is a popular card game played in Asia. The objective is simple, the player who finish the cards on hand first wins. As I was playing with my group of friends, my buddy said :" most expert agrees the player who first starts the game will always win". This statement caught my attention. I proceeded to ask him for more justification. Who are the experts you are quoting here? Could you give me an example. My buddy just replied "do not talk a lot, continue playing."

Let's see...this is a type of prejudicial language called proof substitute.
He mentioned experts but failed to mention who the experts are.