History Main / StrawmanFallacy

22nd Oct '15 4:09:58 AM eroock
Is there an issue? Send a Message


-> "The NRA supports the right to bear arms, so they support private ownership of nuclear weapons."

to:

-> "The ''"The NRA supports the right to bear arms, so they support private ownership of nuclear weapons."
"''
22nd Oct '15 4:09:32 AM eroock
Is there an issue? Send a Message


!Variants:

to:

!Variants:
!!Variants:
22nd Oct '15 4:06:53 AM eroock
Is there an issue? Send a Message


Sometimes this takes the form of a sort of reverse NoTrueScotsman:

->"Christians hate <insert group>!"
->"I'm Christian, and I don't hate <group>."
->"Then you aren't a REAL Christian."


!!!Examples:

* See TheWarOnStraw.
* Beloved of {{Author Tract}}s the world over.
* The StrawMisogynist and the StrawFeminist both use this technique subtly (although the latter applies much more than the former).

to:

For examples see TheWarOnStraw. Beloved of {{Author Tract}}s the world over. The StrawMisogynist and the StrawFeminist both use this technique subtly (although the latter applies much more than the former).

!Variants:

!!!Reverse No True Scotsman
*
Sometimes this takes the form of a sort of reverse NoTrueScotsman:

->"Christians -->"Christians hate <insert group>!"
->"I'm -->"I'm Christian, and I don't hate <group>."
->"Then -->"Then you aren't a REAL Christian."


!!!Examples:

* See TheWarOnStraw.
* Beloved of {{Author Tract}}s the world over.
* The StrawMisogynist and the StrawFeminist both use this technique subtly (although the latter applies much more than the former).
"



!! '''Red Herring'''
:: While a Strawman will extrapolate details into a second, weaker argument in order to apparently defeat the first, a Red Herring will establish a second, ''different'' argument to try to make everybody else involved forget about the first one.

to:

!! '''Red Herring'''
::
!!! Red Herring
*
While a Strawman will extrapolate details into a second, weaker argument in order to apparently defeat the first, a Red Herring will establish a second, ''different'' argument to try to make everybody else involved forget about the first one.



!!'''Accent'''
!!! Also Called:
* Amphiboly

::A sneakier form of Strawman; here, rather than actually altering their opponent's words, a debater shifts ''emphasis'' to make their opponent appear to be saying something else. For example, "We should not speak '''ill''' of our friends" (stating we should be kind to friends) becomes "we should not speak ill of our '''friends'''" (we can speak ill of anyone else). Commonly used for humour value if it involves a SuspiciouslySpecificDenial, but it's still a fallacy if used as part of an argument; like Strawman, it's an attempt to evade addressing the opponent's real point.

to:

!!'''Accent'''
!!! Also Called:
!!!Accent (aka Amphiboly)

* Amphiboly

::A
A sneakier form of Strawman; here, rather than actually altering their opponent's words, a debater shifts ''emphasis'' to make their opponent appear to be saying something else. For example, "We should not speak '''ill''' of our friends" (stating we should be kind to friends) becomes "we should not speak ill of our '''friends'''" (we can speak ill of anyone else). Commonly used for humour value if it involves a SuspiciouslySpecificDenial, but it's still a fallacy if used as part of an argument; like Strawman, it's an attempt to evade addressing the opponent's real point.
22nd Oct '15 3:56:42 AM eroock
Is there an issue? Send a Message


----

to:

----



-->'''Alice''': Prefer them wild, do you?

to:

-->'''Alice''': Prefer them wild, do you?you?

----
22nd Oct '15 3:53:26 AM eroock
Is there an issue? Send a Message


:: The Strawman Fallacy occurs when a debater constructs a more easily defeated version of his opponent's position to attack, rather than addressing his real arguments. The fallacy takes its name from straw dummies used in old-fashioned combat training; these dummies were made to ''look like'' a potential opponent, but provide no actual resistance. The fallacy itself is comparable to defeating such a dummy, then proclaiming you have defeated an actual opponent.

--> "The NRA supports the right to bear arms, so they support private ownership of nuclear weapons."

:: While most people will not be fooled by a blatant misrepresentation of their position, careful use of a strawman can make them defend a carefully undermined version of their position, allowing their opponent to apparently destroy them with a prepared rebuttal.

:: Sometimes this takes the form of a sort of reverse NoTrueScotsman:

-->"Christians hate <insert group>!"
-->"I'm Christian, and I don't hate <group>."
-->"Then you aren't a REAL Christian."


to:

:: The Strawman Fallacy occurs when a debater constructs a more easily defeated version of his opponent's position to attack, rather than addressing his real arguments. The fallacy takes its name from straw dummies used in old-fashioned combat training; these dummies were made to ''look like'' a potential opponent, but provide no actual resistance. The fallacy itself is comparable to defeating such a dummy, then proclaiming you have defeated an actual opponent.

--> -> "The NRA supports the right to bear arms, so they support private ownership of nuclear weapons."

:: While most people will not be fooled by a blatant misrepresentation of their position, careful use of a strawman can make them defend a carefully undermined version of their position, allowing their opponent to apparently destroy them with a prepared rebuttal.

:: Sometimes this takes the form of a sort of reverse NoTrueScotsman:

-->"Christians
NoTrueScotsman:

->"Christians
hate <insert group>!"
-->"I'm
group>!"
->"I'm
Christian, and I don't hate <group>."
-->"Then ->"Then you aren't a REAL Christian."

----
4th Apr '15 8:18:29 PM Gillimer
Is there an issue? Send a Message


:: While most people will not be fooled by a blatant misrepresentation of their position, careful use of a strawman can make them defend a carefully undermined version of their position, allowing their opponent to apparently destroy them with a prepared rebuttal.

to:

:: While most people will not be fooled by a blatant misrepresentation of their position, careful use of a strawman can make them defend a carefully undermined version of their position, allowing their opponent to apparently destroy them with a prepared rebuttal.
rebuttal.

:: Sometimes this takes the form of a sort of reverse NoTrueScotsman:

-->"Christians hate <insert group>!"
-->"I'm Christian, and I don't hate <group>."
-->"Then you aren't a REAL Christian."

25th Oct '13 7:38:31 PM Kif
Is there an issue? Send a Message



to:

* The StrawMisogynist and the StrawFeminist both use this technique subtly (although the latter applies much more than the former).
12th Jun '13 12:53:05 PM DCC
Is there an issue? Send a Message


--> "The NRA[[hottip:*: The USA's 'National Rifle Association' is an organisation of pro-armament weapons-enthusiasts who believe that the USA's citizens should be armed with military-grade weaponry and trained and organised to fight in military units with roots at the local and regional levels. The reasoning behind this is that the aforementioned paramilitary units would be able to execute armed uprisings or a full-blown civil war against the central government - and those military and paramilitary forces loyal to it - if it instituted policies a majority of them disapproved of.]] supports the right to bear arms, so they support private ownership of nuclear weapons."

to:

--> "The NRA[[hottip:*: The USA's 'National Rifle Association' is an organisation of pro-armament weapons-enthusiasts who believe that the USA's citizens should be armed with military-grade weaponry and trained and organised to fight in military units with roots at the local and regional levels. The reasoning behind this is that the aforementioned paramilitary units would be able to execute armed uprisings or a full-blown civil war against the central government - and those military and paramilitary forces loyal to it - if it instituted policies a majority of them disapproved of.]] NRA supports the right to bear arms, so they support private ownership of nuclear weapons."
7th Apr '13 5:47:24 PM MAI742
Is there an issue? Send a Message


--> "The NRA[[hottip:*: The USA's 'National Rifle Association' is an organisation of pro-armament weapons-enthusiasts who believe that the USA's citizens should be armed with military-grade weaponry and trained and organised to fight in military units with roots at the local and regional levels. Said para-military units would be able to execute armed uprisings or a full-blown civil war against the central government if it instituted policies a majority of them disapprove of without losing the loyalty of the USA's professional military forces.]] supports the right to bear arms, so they support private ownership of nuclear weapons."

to:

--> "The NRA[[hottip:*: The USA's 'National Rifle Association' is an organisation of pro-armament weapons-enthusiasts who believe that the USA's citizens should be armed with military-grade weaponry and trained and organised to fight in military units with roots at the local and regional levels. Said para-military The reasoning behind this is that the aforementioned paramilitary units would be able to execute armed uprisings or a full-blown civil war against the central government - and those military and paramilitary forces loyal to it - if it instituted policies a majority of them disapprove of without losing the loyalty of the USA's professional military forces.disapproved of.]] supports the right to bear arms, so they support private ownership of nuclear weapons."
7th Apr '13 5:43:16 PM MAI742
Is there an issue? Send a Message


--> "The NRA supports the right to bear arms, so they support private ownership of nuclear weapons."

to:

--> "The NRA NRA[[hottip:*: The USA's 'National Rifle Association' is an organisation of pro-armament weapons-enthusiasts who believe that the USA's citizens should be armed with military-grade weaponry and trained and organised to fight in military units with roots at the local and regional levels. Said para-military units would be able to execute armed uprisings or a full-blown civil war against the central government if it instituted policies a majority of them disapprove of without losing the loyalty of the USA's professional military forces.]] supports the right to bear arms, so they support private ownership of nuclear weapons."
This list shows the last 10 events of 13. Show all.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=Main.StrawmanFallacy