Straw Man Argument

【Writing Series 📝】

In this week’s writing, we’ll spend some time on fallacious arguments. First of all, it is essential to understand that a fallacy involves using flawed or incorrect reasoning when constructing an argument, which may seem well-founded if not scrutinized. Fallacies can be employed deliberately to manipulate or deceive, accidentally due to human limitations like carelessness, cognitive biases, or lack of knowledge, or perhaps because of language constraints and comprehension.  In short, the aim of fallacies is to convince others of the validity of an argument or conclusion, even if it lacks substantial logical and reasoning support.

One commonly seen fallacy is known as the Straw Man Argument (Fallacy). Before we get into the meaning, I want you to study this example below to see how it works. 

Suppose my friend Bruce presents the following argument:

Premise 1: We should invest more in public transportation to reduce traffic congestion.

Premise 2: Reducing traffic congestion will lead to lower pollution levels.

Conclusion: Therefore, we should allocate more budget to improve public transportation systems.

Now, let's assume I counter with this objection:

"So, you're saying we should just get rid of all cars and force everyone to take the bus or train? That’s impractical and ignores the fact that many people rely on their cars for various reasons."

Is this a valid response to Bruce's argument? No! Bruce never suggests that giving up cars as a way of transportation would be advisable. That is not the point he is trying to make.

In this scenario, I have committed the Straw Man fallacy by attacking a stance that Bruce does not actually advocate for. The Straw Man fallacy occurs when one distorts an opponent's position to make it easier to criticize.

Just as a scarecrow is designed to imitate a human figure, a Straw Man fallacy occurs when an opponent's stance is distorted to mimic the original argument, though it is not the true assertion being made. This fallacy gives the false impression that an argument has been disproven or criticized by substituting the original stance with a different one.

To see this more clearly, consider the following two claims:

1)We should invest more in public transportation to reduce traffic congestion.

This is Bruce’s original claim.

2) People should just get rid of all cars.

This is my portrayal of Bruce’s original claim.

These two statements are fundamentally different. Bruce only supports the first statement based on our discussion. However, I misrepresented his stance by objecting to the second statement, which is much more extreme and easier to challenge. This extreme viewpoint would require substantial evidence to persuade others to use their car less. By incorrectly attributing this extreme stance to Bruce and then attacking it, I have committed the Straw Man fallacy.

Straw Man fallacies can be found everywhere. Chances are you have encountered different versions of the examples discussed here in your daily life. Occasionally, Straw Man fallacies are deliberate, while at other times they occur unintentionally. To ensure that discussions remain productive, it is crucial to fully understand the viewpoint being put forth before attempting to criticize it. Failing to do so may lead to inadvertently committing the Straw Man fallacy.

Your favorite EMI friend, JJ

—signing off—

Reference: Cooper, S., & Patton, R. (2006). Writing logically, thinking critically. Longman