Straw man argument

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A straw man argument (also straw man fallacy , from English straw man fallacy or straw man argument ) is in rhetoric and especially in eristics a form of the sophistic sham argument ( Red Herring ), which is based on an informal fallacy . This gives the impression of refuting an opponent's argument while actually rejecting an argument (assumed) that was not put forward by the opponent.

term

A straw man argument is used to fake a dispute with the opposing position by contrasting alleged arguments of the other side with one's own arguments. Instead of going into the actual position of the opponent and his arguments, arguments are made against a fictitious opponent who is not present - the "straw man"; often distorted and undifferentiated versions of the opposing arguments are put into the mouth. It is then claimed that the refutation of the straw man position would be a refutation of the actual position of the opponent in the discussion. Since the straw man, in contrast to a real opponent, cannot respond to differentiated objections or even reject them, this is a sophism of the Argumentum ad populum variety . Alternatively, the straw man argument can be viewed as a special form of the false premise .

In the related technique of the advocatus diaboli , a fictitious opponent of one's own position is also built up, only that the arguments of the other side should be brought forward as strongly as possible in order to check the validity of one's own argument and to remedy any weaknesses.

origin

The loan translation of Strohmann-Argument , formed from English, has not yet been included in the vocabulary of the German language by the editors of the German dictionaries , although its occasional use can be proven in a technical jargon . The concept of the straw man goes back to straw dolls that went out of use in the 19th century and were set up during fencing training , among other things .

Methods

There are several methods of straw man reasoning:

  1. The opponent's thesis is distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented, then the distorted thesis is refuted and the claim is that the original thesis is refuted.
  2. Someone is specifically described who defends the opposing thesis with unconvincing arguments. These arguments are refuted and, with the omission of other possible justifications for the thesis, it is asserted that this refutes every representative of this thesis and thus also the thesis itself.
  3. A person is described with questionable beliefs or actions that are supposedly typical of the advocates of the opposing thesis. The thesis is then rejected by association fallacy .
  4. Apparent analogies to the opposing thesis are put forward, which can easily be refuted. In this way one can draw up analogies that are much easier to refute than the thesis that is actually to be refuted.

Strawman arguments can be effective as a rhetorical technique (i.e., persuade people), but they lead the listener to fallacies because the opponent's actual reasoning is not refuted. Straw man arguments can also often be the result of errors of judgment on the part of the speaker, who mistakenly accuse his opponent of the attacked positions because he misunderstood him or is guided by prejudices.

See also

literature

  • Christian Godin: History of Philosophy for Dummies. Wiley-VCH, Weinheim 2008, ISBN 3-527-70328-4 .
  • Douglas Walton: Ad Hominem Arguments. Studies in Rhetoric and Communication. University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa 1998, ISBN 0-8173-0922-5 .
  • Douglas Walton: The straw man fallacy. In: Johan F. A. K. van Bentem u. a. (Ed.): Logic and Argumentation. North-Holland, Amsterdam 1996, ISBN 0-444-85814-8 Negotiations of the Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen, Afdeling Letterkunde, Nieuwe Reeks Series. Volume 170, pp. 115-128.

Web links