Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Unlike the straw man, which involves a distortion of the other party's position, [4] the red herring is a seemingly plausible, though ultimately irrelevant, diversionary tactic. [5] According to the Oxford English Dictionary, a red herring may be intentional or unintentional; it is not necessarily a conscious intent to mislead. [1]
Red herring – introducing a second argument in response to the first argument that is irrelevant and draws attention away from the original topic (e.g.: saying "If you want to complain about the dishes I leave in the sink, what about the dirty clothes you leave in the bathroom?"). [72] In jury trial, it is known as a Chewbacca defense.
[1] [2] This type of argument is called a "quibble" or "quillet". [3] Trivial objections are a special case of red herring. The fallacy often appears when an argument is difficult to oppose. The person making a trivial objection may appear ready to accept the argument in question, but at the same time they will oppose it in many different ways.
Red herring Presenting data or issues that, while compelling, are irrelevant to the argument at hand, and then claiming that it validates the argument. [citation needed] In 1807, William Cobbett wrote how he used red herrings to lay a false trail, while training hunting dogs—an apocryphal story that was probably the origin of the idiom ...
Examples of this include the speaker or writer: [48] Diverting the argument to unrelated issues with a red herring (Ignoratio elenchi) Insulting someone's character (argumentum ad hominem) Assuming the conclusion of an argument, a kind of circular reasoning, also called "begging the question" (petitio principii) Making jumps in logic (non sequitur)
As a Chewbacca defense distracts and misleads, it is an example of a red herring. It is also an example of an irrelevant conclusion, a type of informal fallacy in which one making an argument fails to address the issue in question. [1] [2] Often an opposing counsel can legally object to such arguments by declaring them irrelevant, character ...
Whether one has a particular entitlement or right is irrelevant to whether one's assertion is true or false. Where an objection to a belief is made, the assertion of the right to an opinion side-steps the usual steps of discourse of either asserting a justification of that belief, or an argument against the validity of the objection. [4]
This kind of appeal to emotion is irrelevant to or distracting from the facts of the argument (a so-called "red herring") and encompasses several logical fallacies, including appeal to consequences, appeal to fear, appeal to flattery, appeal to pity, appeal to ridicule, appeal to spite, and wishful thinking.