I hid my exasperation. "Polly, it's a fallacy. The generalization is reached too hastily. There are too few instances to support such a conclusion."
“波莉，”我强压怒火。“这是一种谬误，这个结论下的太草率了，能支持这种结论的证据太少。”
"Know any more fallacies?" she asked breathlessly. "This is more fun than dancing even."
“还有其他的谬误吗？”她屏住呼吸，“这比跳舞有意思多啦！”
I fought off a wave of despair. I was getting nowhere with this girl absolutely nowhere. Still, I am nothing if not persistent. I continued.
我克制自己，不要灰心。这个姑娘，咋教不会，就是不明白。可是，要是不坚持，就会一事无成。我继续讲下去。
"Next comes Post Hoc. Listen to this: Let's not take Bill on our picnic. Every time we take him out with us, it rains."
“下一种是牵强附会。是这样：我们不能带比尔去野餐。每次带他去，都下雨。”
"I know somebody like that," she exclaimed. "A girl back home-Eula Becker, her name is. It never falls. Every single time we take her on a picnic—"
“有这样的人，”她惊叫，“我们家那儿有个女孩，尤拉·贝克。那才准呢，每次我们带她去野餐……”
"Polly," I said sharply, "it's a fallacy. Eula Becker doesn't cause the rain. She has no connection with the rain. You are guilty of Post Hoc if you blame Eula Becker."
“波莉，”我严厉地说，”这是谬误。下雨不是尤拉·贝克造成的，下雨与她没有任何关系。如果把下雨赖到尤拉·贝克身上，你就是牵强附会。”
"I'll never do that again," she promised contritely. "are you mad at me?"
“我再不怨她了，”她懊悔地保证说，“你生气了吗？”
I sighed deeply. "No, Polly, I'm not mad."
我深深地叹了口气：“不，波莉，没生气。”
"Then tell me some more fallacies."
“那就讲讲还有哪些谬误！”
"All right. Let's try Contradictory Premises."
“好，现在说说矛盾前提。”
"Yes, let's," she chirped, blinking her eyes happily.
“行，好呀！”她喳喳叫着，快乐地眨着眼睛。
I frowned, but plunged ahead. "Here's an example of Contradictory Premises: If Cod can do anything, can He make a stone so heavy that He won't be able to lift it?"
我皱了下眉头，继续说：“有一个矛盾前提的例子——如果上帝是万能的，他能造出一块连他自己也搬不动的大石头吗？”
"Of course," she replied promptly.
“当然能！”她当即答道。
"But if He can do anything, He can lift the stone," I pointed out.
“但是如果他是万能的，他就能搬动那块石头。”我提醒说。
"Yeah," she said thoughtfully. "Well, then I guess He can't make the stone."
“是呀！”她思索着，“那么，我想他造不出那样的石头。”
"But He can do anything," I reminded her.
“可他是万能的。”我进一步提醒。
She scratched her pretty, empty head. "I'm all confused," she admitted.
她挠了挠她那漂亮的空脑袋。“我想不明白。”她承认。
"Of course you are. Because when the premises of an argument contradict each other, there can be no argument. If there is an irresistible force, there can be no immovable object. If there is an immovable object, there can be no irresistible force. Get it?"
“你确实不明白。如果一个结论与前提互为矛盾，那么这种结论就不能成立。假如有不可抗拒的力量，就不存在不可移动的物体；假如存在不可移动的物体，就不可能有不可抗拒的力量。懂了吗？”