Conspiracy Myths (6) - Red Herring and other fishy things
Red Herring and other fishy things
Here are some Red Herring examples (i.e., someone deliberately tries to derail the discussion
from the relevant issue to a different one)
I don't
know Putin, have no deals in Russia, and the haters are going crazy - yet Obama
can make a deal with Iran, #1 in terror, no problem!
“It’s
locker room talk, and it’s one of those things. I will knock the hell out of
ISIS. We’re going to defeat ISIS. ISIS happened a number of years ago in a
vacuum that was left because of bad judgment. And I will tell you, I will take
care of ISIS.”
Darwinism
has had a bad influence on people’s morale, and must therefore be wrong.
(Ignorantio elenchi: argumentation not relevant for original question about
whether evolution theory is true or not; ignorantio elenchi is similar to the
effect of a Red Herring, i.e., the use of (intentionally) misleading arguments
or facts).
Straw man Response
A Straw Man
is a form of response where the opponent’s statements are not properly
addressed or not properly answered. Instead, a response is given to an altered
(weaker or distorted) statement that the opponent never said. This includes:
citing an opponent’s words out of context, or exaggerating them, or
simplifying, or presenting them in a distorted manner:
Example
from a draft of a bill (HCR 74) considered by the Louisiana State
Legislature in 2001:
Whereas,
the writings of Charles Darwin, the father of evolution, promoted the
justification of racism, and his books On the Origin of
Species and The Descent of Man postulate a hierarchy of superior
and inferior races. . . . Therefore, be it resolved that the legislature of
Louisiana does hereby deplore all instances and all ideologies of racism,
does hereby reject the core concepts of Darwinist ideology that certain races
and classes of humans are inherently superior to others, and does hereby
condemn the extent to which these philosophies have been used to justify and
approve racist practices.
Raising the bar
Postulation:
Ingredient X is the reason for the allergy. Scientific research: no correlation. Changed postulation: OK, then
it was ingredient Y. Scientific research:
no correlation. Changed postulation: it was only a very small amount of
either X or Y that are not measurable by your scientific method. (This is
called: raising the bar, or moving the goal posts, and this method keeps myths
and conspiracies alive)
Comments
Post a Comment