The straw man fallacy

There are discussions that can be really desperate. Sometimes, instead of using rational arguments or sticking to the facts, Our “verbal opponents” use arguments that are not honest or that appeal to emotions instead of reason.. One of the most common is known as the straw man fallacy.

Argumentative fallacies are made up of arguments that, despite appearing valid, are not. They are wrong lines of reasoning.; However, it is not uncommon to find them supporting different positions. The conclusions derived from them will be erroneous or, rather, they will not necessarily be true.

Specifically, the straw man fallacy occurs when a person takes an argument from their opponent and twists it to make it seem less credible. Nowadays, It is one of the most used forms of manipulation. In this article we will see exactly what it consists of, as well as some examples.

What are argumentative fallacies?

The study of fallacies is part of disciplines such as philosophy and psychology. Since centuries, Attempts have been made to identify different wrong ways of arguing that apparently pass for correct ones.

For many centuries it has been thought that human beings have a great capacity to think rationally. However, in recent decades, research has indicated that rationality is rather an exception. Contrary to what was believed until now, we tend to get carried away by unconscious biases.

Thus, when we are presented with an argument, Many times it is difficult for us to know if it uses logic in a valid way or not.. In cases where an argument seems rational but is not really rational, we are faced with a fallacy. There are many different types, but one of the most common is the straw man.

What is the straw man fallacy?

The straw man fallacy consists of modifying a valid argument of our rival with another that is similar to it, but is wrong. This way, it is easier to refute it and make the other person lose credibility. In general, it is usually used to defend political, religious and social ideologies.

For this reason, it is common to find the straw man fallacy when talking about issues such as abortion or immigration. We can also come across it in political debates, in the media or in official statements. The intention and objective behind it is to not have to face someone else’s arguments. This is because, through the straw man fallacy, the opponent’s arguments are replaced by other absurdities.

The structure of the fallacy is the following:

A person makes argument “A”. His opponent distorts it and replaces it with argument “B”. This is similar, but wrong. The second person refutes argument “B”. Because he has equated the two arguments, it appears that “A” has also been refuted.

Examples

Below we will see some examples to illustrate what this fallacy consists of.

1- Laws on alcohol

Let’s imagine a debate on changing the minimum legal drinking age for beer. The discussion, following the straw man fallacy, could take this form:

Person A. We should consider lowering the minimum beer drinking age to 16. At that age, the human body is already prepared to withstand the effects of alcoholic beverages. Person B: That’s crazy. If we start giving alcohol to children indiscriminately, society will suffer all kinds of problems.

As you can see, person B has not responded to the argument raised by A. On the contrary, he has taken what he proposed to the extreme (he has equated 16-year-old people with children). This way, avoid having to argue with him on a rational level.

2- Human evolution

Person A. Humans share several common ancestors with modern-day primates. We have large amounts of evidence on this topic. Person B: If people come from monkeys, how come chimpanzees still exist?

In this case, person B does not fully understand how evolution works. Therefore, instead of refuting that it exists through logic, uses a fallacious argument that does not respond to what A has said. In this case, the fallacy could also be considered a reductio ad absurdum.

The straw man fallacy is one of the most common. That’s why It is essential to identify it, and for us to be able to debate using logic and rationality.

You might be interested…