Straw Man Argument

Straw Man Argument Fallacy

A straw man argument is a logical fallacy because it counters an argument that is not being made. Here is a simple example:

Of course, Person A never claimed that a “microgram” of trans fat will give you cancer and kill you. This was not the argument. Person A merely stated that trans fat is “not good” for you. This means that large amounts of trans fat could put someone at greater risk of a heart condition.

Just because "trans fat" is the subject, not all arguments about it are the same. This is a straw-man argument.

Person A should have been more specific in their argument, but even a specific argument is not immune to the straw man fallacy. Someone who employs the straw man argument can make any argument different by exaggerating it.

Because Person B is making up a new argument to defeat, and they are failing to address the argument being made. They are committing the straw man logical fallacy.

Straw Man Argument Example in an Essay

In school, you will frequently find straw man arguments in literary analysis and argumentative essays. Here’s an example, which discusses a made-up work of fiction.

Can you spot the straw man argument?

Commentators and characters call John Galileo a hero for saving the ship. No one calls him a “paragon of virtue.” Calling someone a “hero” is a bold claim, but calling someone a “paragon of virtue” is a sainted designation. This is an exaggeration.

To understand the use of the straw man argument in this story, you need to acknowledge that Galileo is arguably a hero for saving a ship full of people. However, it is much harder to argue that he, as a man, is perfect because he saved a ship full of people. By countering the argument that Galileo is a paragon of virtue, instead of addressing the argument that he is a hero, the writer exemplifies the exaggeration and incoherence of the straw man fallacy.

Counter the point being made, not a straw man.

How to Avoid Using the Straw Man Argument

Here are some ways to avoid the straw man argument in your own writing.

1. Know your opponent’s argument. If you know what your opponent is really trying to say, you will not err by addressing an incorrect argument.

2. Soften strong claims. When attempting to counter an argument, don’t “go big.” Don’t say the biggest, most persuasive sounding thing you could possibly say. If you do, you are prone to exaggerate.

3. Don’t limit yourself to understanding one side of an argument. When you only listen to one side of an argument, you are listening in an echo chamber. This chamber will get louder and louder, and the truth might escape you. If you don’t look outside the box, you are liable to think that your opponent’s arguments are more extreme than they might be; when this happens, you are not arguing against your opponent any longer… you are arguing against a straw man.

Straw Man Fallacy Synonyms

There are no direct synonyms for the straw man fallacy. Though, the straw man argument is sometimes written as “strawman argument.”

The straw man argument is a kind of irrelevant conclusion, or ignoratio elenchi ( which means "ignoring refutation" in Latin). Because of this, the straw man argument is related to missing the point—the red herring—and the non sequitur. The straw man argument is also broadly a fallacy of relevance because it appeals to evidence unrelated to the original conclusion.

Difference Between Straw Man and Red Herring

A straw man is addressing an exaggerated argument. A red herring is something different.

Person B does not counter Person A’s argument at all—not even in an exaggerated form. Instead, they steer the conversation away from the topic altogether using a red herring (irrelevant idea). In this case they used the topic “celebrating natural history,” which sounds great but is not the same topic as preserving ancient growth forests.