Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
As an informal fallacy, the red herring falls into a broad class of relevance fallacies. 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 ]
The fallacy is sometimes presented as "let's agree to disagree". [3] 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 ...
Yet, if Speaker B believes the maxim "it is acceptable to break the law to wrong those who also break the law", they are committing no logical fallacy. From the conversation above, it is impossible to know which Speaker B believes. This fallacy is often used as a red herring, or an attempt to change or distract from the issue. For example:
For example, oxygen is necessary for fire. But one cannot assume that everywhere there is oxygen, there is fire. A condition X is sufficient for Y if X, by itself, is enough to bring about Y. For example, riding the bus is a sufficient mode of transportation to get to work.
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 ...
Fans quickly decoded the jumble of letters to read “red herring” and “DPT” as the reverse initials for the Tortured Poets Department.. Swift, 34, has dropped many clues ahead of TTPD’s ...
Trivial objections (also referred to as hair-splitting, nothing but objections, barrage of objections and banal objections) is an informal logical fallacy where irrelevant and sometimes frivolous objections are made to divert the attention away from the topic that is being discussed. [1] [2] This type of argument is called a "quibble" or "quillet".
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)