deepstash
Beta
8 Logical Fallacies that Mess Us All Up | Mark Manson
Many arguments are distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented, sometimes beyond recognition, to mean something else that can be easily attacked.
This is called the “straw man” fallacy because, like replacing a real person with a person made of straw, you’re replacing a stronger argument with a weaker one in order to more easily discredit it.
149 SAVES
SIMILAR ARTICLES & IDEAS:
16
Key Ideas
Winning an argument often comes down to who can go the longest without contradicting themselves and keeping sound logic, not direct persuasion of the other party.
Using a single personal experience as the foundation of your argument or your big piece of evidence.
For example, your phone may have broken right after you bought it, but you can’t use that to argue that those phones are not worth the purchase for others.
9
Key Ideas
A fallacy is the use of faulty reasoning in an argument.
There are formal and informal fallacies:
In this fallacy, someone behaves in a way that negatively affects others but then gets upset when others criticize their behavior. They will reply with a "mind your own business."
For instance, someone who doesn't see a reason to bathe, but then boards a full 10-hour flight.
It happens when someone continues in a course of action, even if evidence shows that it's a mistake.
Common phrase: "We've always done it this way, so we'll keep doing it this way." "I've already invested so much..."
7
Key Ideas
A straw man argument is a misrepresentation of an opinion or viewpoint, designed to be as easy as possible to contradict.
The only purpose is for it to be easy to expose. It’s not an argument you happen to find inconvenient or challenging. It’s one that is logically flawed.
This is a weak case (similar to the Straw man arguments) attributed to a non-existent group: Someone will fabricate a viewpoint that is easy to contradict, then claim it was made by a group they disagree with. Arguing against an opponent which doesn’t exist is a pretty easy way to win any debate.
People who use hollow man arguments will often use vague, non-specific language without explicitly giving any sources or stating who their opponent is.
It is designed to be resistant to attacks by a defier.There arguments are difficult to avoid because they have a lot of overlap with legitimate debate techniques.
A person using an iron man argument will most likely make their own viewpoint so vague that nothing anyone says about it can weaken it. They’ll use jargon and imprecise terms. This means they can claim anyone who disagrees didn’t understand them, or they’ll rephrase their argument multiple times.