The fallacy of Straw Man

 

 

 

What is the fallacy of Straw Man? How is it different than simply disagreeing with someone else’s point of view?
Use the material in Vaughn’s book to help you give a detailed explanation of what the mistake in a Straw Man is. To demonstrate your understanding and to teach the idea to the rest of the class, provide a relevant real-life example of the logical mistake. (You MAY use an outside source to help you present your example; be sure to summarize or paraphrase, cite, and use announcing verbs.) Choose carefully – consider whether your example does a good job of illustrating a Straw Man. Compare it to similar fallacies, and show why your example is a Straw Man rather than another fallacy like an Appeal to the Person. The discussion of your example should be detailed so that readers can evaluate the fallacy. Argue the case for why your example is an example of Straw Man.

 

 

 

 

Sample Solution

A straw man fallacy occurs when someone takes another person`s argument or point, distorts it or exaggerates it in some kind of extreme way, and then attacks the extreme distortion, as if that is really the claim the first person is making. For example, Person 1 might say: “I think pollution from humans contributes to climate change.” Person 2: “So, you think humans are directly responsible for extreme weather, like hurricanes, and have caused the droughts in the southwestern U.S.?” The straw man fallacy is different from simply disagreeing with someone else`s point of view because it not distorting the other person`s view. Disagreeing with someone else`s point of view would simply be to understand all their points and still disagree.

regards to the osmosis of pieces into lumps. Mill operator recognizes pieces and lumps of data, the differentiation being that a piece is comprised of various pieces of data. It is fascinating regards to the osmosis of pieces into lumps. Mill operator recognizes pieces and lumps of data, the differentiation being that a piece is comprised of various pieces of data. It is fascinating to take note of that while there is a limited ability to recall lumps of data, how much pieces in every one of those lumps can change broadly (Miller, 1956). Anyway it’s anything but a straightforward instance of having the memorable option huge pieces right away, somewhat that as each piece turns out to be more natural, it very well may be acclimatized into a lump, which is then recollected itself. Recoding is the interaction by which individual pieces are ‘recoded’ and allocated to lumps. Consequently the ends that can be drawn from Miller’s unique work is that, while there is an acknowledged breaking point to the quantity of pi

This question has been answered.

Get Answer
WeCreativez WhatsApp Support
Our customer support team is here to answer your questions. Ask us anything!
👋 Hi, Welcome to Compliant Papers.