Wikipedia tells me the logical fallacy ignoratio elenchi should not be confided with a straw man argument but can anyone explain for me the difference, with clear examples?
Quick links: NewsBiscuit Home • Chat Room • Writers' Room • Top Ten
Logical Phalasies
(6 posts) (4 voices)
-
Not sure if it always is, but a straw man can be a misrepresentation of an argument in order to draw an irrelevant conclusion, whereas ignoratio elenchi is any means of drawing an irrelevant conclusion from an argument.
Straw man example:
B-j - The problem with capital punishment is that it is just so difficult to reverse.
Titus - So is taking away 20, 30 or more years of someone's life.
This is a straw man because B-j is referring to the reversal of a capital sentence being unable to result in freedom, unlike the reversal of a custodial sentence. Whereas Titus has pretended B-j is merely referring to the reversal of a capital sentence being unable to result in the years of their life taken away being then given back.
He has misrepresented B-j's meaning of 'reverse' in order to draw an irrelevant conclusion, that there is no difference between the reversal of a custodial and that of a capital sentence.
Ignoratio elenchi example:
B-j - The problem with capital punishment is that it is just so difficult to reverse.
Titus - By locking someone up you are taking away their life just as much by hanging them...But if you are a squeamish hypocrite you can convince yourself that you haven't 'killed' them, so that's all right.
This ignores B-j's argument about the reversal of a sentence. This allows Titus to assume that, in the scenario where a person was imprisoned for life, they died. This of course misses the point, that a prisoner can be released and a dead man can't, so his conclusion that the person has been killed in both scenarios is irrelevant.
(You could argue that he applies the straw man definition of 'reversal' in order to ignore B-j's argument but that muddies the examples so I thought I'd leave it out).
Posted 3 weeks ago # -
Thanks for your time, Ben, though not sure I've totally got it. Maybe Ig. El. = missing the point of your opponent's argument, whether deliberately or through stupidity/illogicality.
Straw man = the deliberate missing of the point by substituting a weaker argument that your opponent was never making?? The 2nd a more specific eg of the first?Posted 2 weeks ago # -
So I was right then?
Is this a straw man example?
- The problem with capital punishment is that it is just so difficult to reverse.
- Jesus came back from the dead.There then follows a discussion about resurrection.
Posted 2 weeks ago # -
A musical acquaintance of mine played fiddle in the band in The Wicker Man.
Does this help?
Posted 2 weeks ago # -
Granger - Looks like you've got it to me.
B-j - Your example doesn't look like a straw man to me, as there is no misrepresentation of the argument. It might be better described as a 'reification', when an abstract idea is treated as if it were real?
Chip - I suppose it depends on what you mean by 'help'.
Posted 2 weeks ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.