What is the fallacy of Straw Man?
There are a vast amount of fallacies in the English language which are somewhat intimidating. However, this intimidation does not need to occur because these fallacies tend to present a clear meaning when in-depth research is conducted on each. For instance, Straw man fallacy is regularly preferred and used by many scholars, researchers, and tutors within the English language. Macagno and Walton (2017) assert that the Straw man fallacy is a unique type of fallacy that is used as a mechanism of conducting an attack on an argument of the opposition. This tactic is employed in cases that involve heavy debates such as politics and other controversial debates. In most cases, the speaker or the writer deliberately misinterprets the opposition’s views or opinions as a way of making their claim easier to be refuted. Schumann, Zufferey, and Oswald (2019) adds that incorporating the Straw man’s fallacy always results in the opposition’s opinions and views to turn out to be simpler than it is in reality, therefore allowing the proponents to tear them apart with ease. This technique is usually done through omitting important and relevant points and leaving those points which are easily refutable to be argued against.
How is it different than simply disagreeing with someone else’s point of view?
The Straw man policy is different than the common disagreements where it involves an opponent’s point of view. This is because it entails one person putting forward a claim or an argument and then the second person distorting the view of the claim or the argument (Visser, Koszowy, Konat, Budzynska, and Reed, 2018). Furthermore, the second person conducts an attack on the distorted argument which they will have created as a mechanism of refuting the original argument or claim made by the first person.
Use the material in Vaughn’s book to help you give a detailed explanation of what the mistake in a Straw Man is
Vaughn cites the straw man argument as an unfair characterization of the arguments made by the opponents. Vaughn further asserts that the arguments are designed to facilitate criticism especially in political discourse and in uncivil discussions. Additionally, the Straw man’s fallacy discusses at length abortion or immigration issues (Visser et al. 2018). The intentions behind these discussions always involve not to face someone’s arguments, they are normally replaced with other absurd views.
To demonstrate your understanding and to teach the idea to the rest of the class, provide a relevant real-life example of the logical mistake.
The straw man fallacy structure involves one person raising an argument A while his opponents distort it and replace it with argument B. this makes the two arguments appear similar but they are erroneous. The second person goes ahead refuting argument B and because he has managed to get the two arguments, it turns out to look like argument A has also been refuted (Macagno, & Walton, 2017). Some of the best examples used to illustrate this fallacy are stated below.
Alcohol laws
Let us imagine a debate that entails changing the minimum legal age for taking beer. The straw man fallacy discussion in this debate will take this form.
Person A: We should put in place mechanisms and pass laws that involve lowering the minimum age for drinking beer to 16. This age is suitable because the human body is prepared to withstand some of the effects that are associated with alcoholic beverages
Person B: That is crazy. If will allow children to start taking alcohol indiscriminately, the society will suffer the most from all kinds of problems and vices.
From the debate, person B does not respond to the argument made by person A. instead, he goes to the extreme what person ‘A’ made, and he equates the 16-year-old with children. This is because person B is trying to avoid arguing with person A at a rational level.
Human evolution
Person A: today’s human beings share several common ancestors. There is profound evidence on this subject
Person B: if at all people originated from the monkeys, why do we still have chimpanzees?
From the case above, person B tends not to have a deeper understanding of how evolution works. Instead of challenging the fact that it exists using logical proofs and examples, he incorporates a fallacious argument that does not respond to the views of person A. furthermore, this case fallacy may be referred to as a reduction to the absurd.
The straw man fallacy is the most commonly used in most cases. That is why it is very easy and essential to identify it with ease and be able to conduct a debate using rationality and logic. Based on research by Schumann, Zufferey, and Oswald (2019), when questioning other types of fallacies, it is evident that the augmentative fallacies are always formed through arguments that despite being valid, they are not. They have wrong lines of reasoning. However, it is rear to find them supporting different positions. The conclusions derived from such fallacies will be not true or turns to be erroneous.
References
Macagno, F., & Walton, D. (2017). Interpreting straw man argumentation: The pragmatics of quotation and reporting (Vol. 14). Springer.
Visser, J., Koszowy, M., Konat, B., Budzynska, K., & Reed, C. (2018). Straw man as misuse of rephrasing. In 2nd European Conference on Argumentation (pp. 941-963). College Publications.
Schumann, J., Zufferey, S., & Oswald, S. (2019). What makes a straw man acceptable? Three experiments assessing linguistic factors. Journal of pragmatics, 141, 1-15.