A simple, classic example of a logical fallacy is the red herring. As traditionalist Matt Slick (of the Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry) defines it, it is “introducing a topic not related to the subject at hand.” 1 Matt Slick, “Logical Fallacies or Fallacies in Argumentation,” Christian Apolegetics and Research Ministry, n.d., (Accessed on April 21, 2014).This fallacy is closely related to the non-sequitur, as discussed in Part 1. What distinguishes the red herring from the non-sequitur is that the red herring has an element of distraction. Rather than simply not addressing the issue, a red herring gives an answer that distracts from the actual issue at hand but poses as a legitimate response. For example, they are often employed in mystery novels in order to. A red herring is a logical fallacy in which irrelevant information is presented in order to divert attention from the original issue. This fallacy pops up often in politics, especially in campaigns. In literature, red herrings can refer to any kind of misdirection used by the author. Think of something like this:Ĭandidate 1: If you cut the top marginal income tax rate to 5%, how do you plan on expanding government services, as you have promised?Ĭandidate 2: Uh…Well, uh….Freedom! Patriotism! Jobs! God! Equality! America! For the purposes of illustration, think about the exaggerated moments in sitcoms and satires. The above is an extreme example, but you get the point.
The argument doesn’t even address the point. Candidate 2’s shouting out buzzwords doesn’t answer the question about his tax plan, let alone answer it well.
And yet, Candidate 2 basically evades the question by giving an answer that in this case doesn’t even make sense, but successfully diverts attention from the topic at hand. A red herring is a logical fallacy because ultimately, there isn’t even an argument made, at least not in a meaningful sense.
0 kommentar(er)
