Straw man

For other uses, see the logical fallacy.

"Man of straw" redirects here. For the novel Man of Straw by Heinrich Mann, see Der Untertan.

A Straw Man argument is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position. To "set up a straw man," one describes a position that superficially resembles an opponent's actual view, yet is easier to refute, then attributes that position to the opponent. For example, someone might deliberately overstate the opponent's position. While a straw man argument may work as a rhetorical technique—and succeed in persuading people—it carries little or no real evidential weight, since the opponent's actual argument has not been refuted.

Its name is derived from the practice of using straw men in combat training. In such training, a scarecrow is made in the image of the enemy with the single intent of attacking it. Such a target is, naturally, immobile and does not fight back, and is not as realistic to test skill against compared to a live and armed opponent. It is occasionally called a straw dog fallacy, scarecrow argument, or wooden dummy argument. In the UK, it is sometimes called Aunt Sally, with reference to a traditional fairground game.

Reasoning

Carefully presenting and refuting a weakened form of an opponent's argument is not always itself a fallacy. It can refocus the scope of an argument or be a legitimate step of a proof by exhaustion. In contrast the straw man fallacy occurs in the following pattern:

1. Person A has position X.

2. Person B ignores X and instead presents position Y.
Y is a distorted version of X and can be set up in several ways, including:

1. Presenting a misrepresentation of the opponent's position and then refuting it, thus giving the appearance that the opponent's actual position has been refuted.
2. Quoting an opponent's words out of context — i.e., choosing quotations that are not representative of the opponent's actual intentions (see contextomy and quote mining).
3. Presenting someone who defends a position poorly as the defender and then refuting that person's arguments, thus giving the appearance that every upholder of that position, and thus the position itself, has been defeated.
4. Inventing a fictitious persona with actions or beliefs that are criticized, such that the person represents a group of whom the speaker is critical.
5. Oversimplifying an opponent's argument, then attacking the simplified version.

3. Person B attacks position Y.

4. Person B draws a conclusion that X is false/incorrect/flawed.
This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because attacking a distorted version of a position simply does not constitute an attack on the position itself.

Examples

• Hypothetical Marijuana debate.

Person A: We should liberalize the laws on marijuana.

Person B: No. Any society with unrestricted access to drugs loses its work ethic and goes only for immediate gratification.

The proposal was to relax laws on marijuana. Person B has exaggerated this to a position harder to defend: "unrestricted access to drugs".

• A beach debate.

Person A: Nude bathing is healthy and nude beaches should be permitted here.

Person B: No. That kind of free sex threatens the morality of society.

B has misrepresented A's position as a call for sexual promiscuity.

• Creation-evolution debate

Person A: The theory of evolution must be taught in science class.

Person B: No, because the universe works too well to be here by pure random chance.

B has misrepresented A's position and the theory of evolution as a cosmogony.

Person A: Life got here by creation.

Person B: No, the earth could not possibly have been created in 6 24-hour days.

(B is representing A as a young-earth creationist, which is more difficult to defend than other types of creationism.)

See also

• List of fallacies
• Ad hominem
• Straw man proposal

External links

• The Straw Man Fallacy at the Fallacy Files
• Straw Man, more examples of straw man arguments