There are too many computational cognitive errors gainfully to go through and refute each one (I’ve seen charts with just logicals that have over 100 members) other than by stating the correct computation…the template explanation is:
– Show the missing/wrong facts, or illustrate the bad logic step (where the claim went wrong) with a historical example
– Re-compute with the correction
– Then show the difference in each of the results
This is the “impromptu” approach that, due to the complexity of facts and the logicals noted, must suffice to cover the vast majority of the universe of error.
Here I try to present those cases that pose the most difficulty in impromptu situations, and especially those that frequently present and are also difficult.