【摘要】 诉诸无知推理形式是无罪推定、有罪推定论证模式的抽象统称。谬误的修辞含义就是公式A在穷尽所有可能状态下,前提不能必然推出结论;如果认识主体强行从前提推出结论,认识主体的推理公式A就是一个谬误,其说服力仅此而已。基于谬误的修辞定义,诉诸无知谬误的修辞含义就是在穷尽所有可能状态下,"不能证明A为真,必然推出A为假",或者"不能证明A为假,必然推出A为真",在经过检验之后,有一些具体诉诸无知论证模式成立,另一些具体的诉诸无知论证模式不成立,它并不是前提在穷尽所有可能状态下能够必然推出结论的,因此,无罪推定和有罪推定是诉诸无知推理形式在法律领域内的具体论证模式,它们的关系应该是推理形式相同,论证层次不同,上位概念规约下位概念的关系。更多还原

【Abstract】 The reasoning form of recourse to ignorant is the abstract name of the patterns of the inno-cence presumption and the guilt presumption. The rhetorical meaning of the fallacy is that the formula A, inthe exhaustion of all possible states, is not necessarily a conclusion; If the cognitive subjects forcibly deducethe conclusion from the premise, it is a fallacy to know the reasoning formula of the subject A, and that is onlythe persuasive force. Based on the definition of fallacy of rhetoric, rhetorical meaning of recourse to ignorantfallacy exhausted all possible states is "cannot prove that A is true, will launch A is false", or "cannot provethat A is false, will launch A is true", after inspection, there are some specific knowledge without resorting toformal reasoning demonstration was established, some specific argument of appeal to ignorance form reasoningis not established, it is not necessary to launch the conclusion on the premise of the exhaustion of all possiblestates, only this. Presumption of innocence and presumption of guilt are concrete reasoning patterns that ap-peal to the demonstration of ignorance in the field of law. Their relations should be same reasoning form; differ-ent levels of argument; the "upper concept" constrains the "lower concept".更多还原