Philosophers refer to fallacies as arguments that may initially appear correct but upon further examination suffer from some form of improper or invalid reasoning.[1] One of the most important fallacies to spot is called the straw man fallacy. It occurs when one attacks a false version of their opponent’s view. This type of fallacy negatively affects all parties: the one person’s view has been wrongly characterized, the opponent believes the illusion that he has defeated his opponent, and the audience has been misled, all the while nothing has been accomplished. Christian apologists and philosophers ought to learn how to detect the making of a straw man argument by either himself or his opponent.
What are some red flags to look for?
First, overconfidence. Being overly confident that your argument is unobjectionable might lead to a negative attitude toward opposing views, especially when those opposing arguments are sound. A negative attitude then tends to caricaturize those opposing views.
Second, closed-mindedness. One who assumes no other view might be correct makes it more likely to mischaracterize their opponent’s view intentionally, so as to assure that his or her argument cannot be considered implausible.
Third, sarcasm and rhetorical comments. If you or your opposition are relying on rhetoric to get the point across, it is more likely that any differing view will be spoken of with similar rhetoric, rather than dealing with the substance of the arguments.
How do I prevent the straw man fallacy?
Be charitable toward the views and arguments of your opponent. Do not assume you know everything about what they are saying! Ask questions of clarification. Instead of saying “this is what so-and-so means,” say “if what so-and-so means by that is…” To the best of your ability avoid the possibility of your opponent replying “that is not what I meant.”
[1] Lee, Siu-Fan. Logic: A Complete Introduction. Great Britain: Hodder & Stoughton, 2017.
Comments