History Main / StrawmanFallacy

* Ironmanning, where one's own or another's position is intentionally misrepresented, to make it appear that one's arguments are stronger than they actually are in order to more easily defend a position, or to make it appear that one's critics are unfair or shrill. Also known as a Rampart and the Moat argument.

--> '''Alice''': Health Insurance is too expensive. Something must be done to bring down the costs.

* Ironmanning, where one's own or another's position is intentionally misrepresented, to make it appear that one's arguments are stronger than they actually are in order to more easily defend a position, or to make it appear that one's critics are unfair or shrill.

* Steelmanning, where the ''strongest'' possible interpretation of an argument or position is rebutted, even if it is not necessarily the position the opponent actually presented.

:: Bob has successfully sidetracked Alice from the cost of health insurance to the necessity of many medical tests.

:: In this extended form it should be clear what the problem is; Bob is addressing a claim Alice obviously never made (that the unmade bed was not a form of human expression) and therefore using a distorted version of her position to rebut her. This is true even if the Suppressed Correlative uses the word in a ''more technically correct way'' than the original: if you know your opponent is using a word incorrectly, it follows you know what they intended it to say and should rebut ''that'' argument.

:: In this extended form it should be clear what the problem is: Bob is addressing a claim Alice obviously never made (that the unmade bed was not a form of human expression) and therefore using a distorted version of her position to rebut her. This is true even if the Suppressed Correlative uses the word in a ''more technically correct way'' than the original: if you know your opponent is using a word incorrectly, it follows you know what they intended it to say and should rebut ''that'' argument.

::In this extended form it should be clear what the problem is: Bob is addressing a claim Alice obviously never made (that the unmade bed was not a form of human expression) and therefore using a distorted version of her position to rebut her. This is true even if the Suppressed Correlative uses the word in a ''more technically correct way'' than the original: if you know your opponent is using a word incorrectly, it follows you know what they intended it to say and should rebut ''that'' argument.

In this extended form it should be clear what the problem is: Bob is addressing a claim Alice obviously never made (that the unmade bed was not a form of human expression) and therefore using a distorted version of her position to rebut her. This is true even if the Suppressed Correlative uses the word in a ''more technically correct way'' than the original: if you know your opponent is using a word incorrectly, it follows you know what they intended it to say and should rebut ''that'' argument.

!!!Suppressed Correlative (aka Lost Constrast)

!!!Reverse No True Scotsman
* 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."

** This can include when the representation is insulting or crude, but accurate. That can be a form of AdHominem or satire.

* PoesLaw is a claim that a group is actually so extreme, it is impossible to make a strawman of them.

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).

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

!Variants:

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).

!! '''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.

----

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

:: 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."

:: 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.

--> "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."

--> "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."

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

--> '''Alice''': "Health Insurance is too expensive. Something must be done to bring down the costs."
--> '''Bob''': "It wouldn't be so expensive if doctors didn't order so many unnecessary, expensive tests."
--> '''Alice''': "Most of those tests are not unnecessary! They save lives!"

-->'''Bob''': "I can't believe some people. I'd never do anything like that with a domesticated horse, it's despicable."
-->'''Alice''': "Prefer them wild, do you?"

->Bob: "I can't believe some people. I'd never do anything like that with a domesticated horse, it's despicable."
->Alice: "Prefer them wild, do you?"