Example of red herring logical fallacy code#

If someone is using the red herring fallacy, it is important to refocus the discussion on the original issue and to avoid being distracted by the irrelevant topics. It is important to be aware of this fallacy and to recognize when it is being used in an argument. If you make a clue so obvious that it shouts out at the reader too much, theyre likely to recognise it as a red herring and dismiss it. The red herring fallacy is a common form of argumentative fallacies, and can be seen in many debates and discussions. It is also considered a type of “straw man” argument, where the person making the argument presents a weaker version of their opponent’s argument in order to make it easier to defeat. It is considered a logical fallacy because it does not address the issue and instead focuses on something else. This could be done as a way to avoid admitting one’s own mistakes or weaknesses, or to discredit the opponent’s argument. In an argument, the red herring fallacy is used to divert the discussion away from the topic at hand and onto a different, unrelated topic. If a topic is proposed, and we can speak or write. These distractions can be made in the form of an emotional response, such as an appeal to fear or anger, or an irrelevant piece of information. Sir Arthur Conan Doyles Sherlock Holmes: The Hound of the Baskervilles presents a classic example of an RH.

This same concept is applied to arguments, where irrelevant topics are used to distract the opponent or audience from the main point.

The term “red herring” originates from the hunting practice of dragging a smelly, red fish across the scent trail of a fox, which would distract the fox and allow the hunters to catch it. It is considered a fallacy because it does not add any relevant information to the discussion, but instead distracts from the original issue. It is a form of misdirection that draws attention away from the original issue, and is often used to divert attention away from an argument’s weaknesses. Tip: Impress your friends by telling them that there is no such fish species as a 'red herring ' rather it refers to a particularly pungent fish-typically a herring but not always-that has been strongly cured in brine and/or heavily smoked.The Red Herring fallacy is a logical fallacy that occurs when a topic is introduced in an argument that does not directly relate to the issue being discussed. This could be for the purpose of entertainment, avoiding embarrassment, or any other purpose including argumentation. Example of a False Dilemma Fallacy Lets say that youre still working on finding homes for houseless people in your community. Variation: Misdirection is a more generic term for diverting attention away from something. shifting the young-earth creation timeline where it does not necessarily coincide with the Bible.Įxception: Using a red herring to divert attention away from your opponent's red herring, might work, but do two wrongs make a right? The universe can be as old as about 10,000 years.Įxplanation: Marty has succeeded in avoiding the devastating question by introducing a new topic for debate.

Example of red herring logical fallacy code#

Mike: It’s a code of conduct shared by cultures.Įxplanation: Ken has successfully derailed this conversation off of his sexual digressions to the deep, existential, discussion on morality.īilly: How could the universe be 6000 years old when we know the speed of light, the distance of astronomical objects (13+ billion light years away), and the fact that the light has reached us ? Mike: It is morally wrong to cheat on your spouse, why on earth would you have done that? While it is similar to the avoiding the issue fallacy, the red herring is a deliberate diversion of attention with the intention of trying to abandon the original argument. The red herring fallacy got its name from the red herring (a cured and salted fish) that was often used by fugitives to divert bloodhounds with its pungent. (also known as: beside the point, misdirection, changing the subject, false emphasis, the Chewbacca defense, irrelevant conclusion, irrelevant thesis, clouding the issue, ignorance of refutation)ĭescription: Attempting to redirect the argument to another issue to which the person doing the redirecting can better respond.