Chapter 100 <Your words are wrong>

Since a certain school launched the Learning from Lei Feng activity, the number of students who care about the collective and help others has gradually increased. A student in a certain class did something beneficial to the collective, but no one else knew who did it.Xiao Liu, a student in this class, said to Xiao Wang: According to my analysis, this incident may have been done by Xiao Li from our class.Xiao Wang said with confidence: No, it couldn't be Xiao Li. After investigation, it was found that this incident was not done by Xiao Li, but by another student in the class.At this time, Xiao Wang proudly said to Xiao Liu: "How is it?"What you said was wrong, and you also said that Xiao Li might have done it!Xiao Liu was speechless for a while.

Was Xiao Liu's initial judgment really wrong?Can Xiao Wang's rebuttal to Xiao Liu stand?A person who lacks logical knowledge may not be able to figure it out, and may even think that Xiao Liu's words are wrong and Xiao Wang's rebuttal is correct.But if we have the relevant logical knowledge, the problem is not difficult to solve. The knowledge of formal logic about the true-false relationship between modal judgments tells us that this matter may be done by Xiao Li and this matter is indeed not done by Xiao Li. , that is, when the latter is true, the former is uncertain, so the latter cannot be used to negate the former.That is to say, although the facts have proved that this matter was not done by Xiao Li, it still cannot prove that Xiao Li could not have done it.Since the fact that this incident could not have been done by Xiao Li has not yet been proven, it cannot be used as an argument to deny that this incident may have been done by Xiao Li.It can be seen that the sophistical nature of Xiao Wang's rebuttal to Xiao Liu is that he made a mistake in the expected reason.