Straw Man Policy

In most arguments we encounter, there are various logical fallacies. Straw man fallacy is among other logical fallacies. The Straw man fallacy is when an individual argues with a more overemphasized and confounded version of the counter-argument. Straw man fallacy also involves manipulation and distortion of the opponent’s view, ensuring the opponent is easily attacked. Many people use the straw man fallacy without their consent. This essay will expound on the straw man fallacy and how it is distinguished from simple differeces in individual points of view.

 The straw man fallacy is very common in the political world. Politicians use various methods to garner support from the voters. Politicians’ attacks and misunderstandings frequently surround the political world as political leaders embrace various techniques to destroy an opponent’s image (Bizer et al., 2009). Straw man fallacy occurs when an individual distorts or exaggerates the view of a certain opponent (Bizer et al., 2009). The straw man fallacy is a technology that works in a way accordant with a less strong argument.

It is predicted that the methods wuld work perfectly when persuading people who are very slow in processing information. The fallacy of the straw man would less influence individuals with the high processing power of the message. Political and social scientist observers consider the straw man fallacy is the centerpiece of the political scene. Most politicians embrace the fallacy of straw man because it is among the most fallacious intercept of argumentation in the contemporary political world. The straw man fallacy is the reason why politicians move around with straw men when campaigning. Indeed, the straw man fallacy is commonly embraced in the political world.

The straw man fallacy occurs during argumentative context between two speakers (A and B) where A stands for the proponent and B represent the opponent placed in an inaccurate manner which strengthen A’s case against B. Fallacy of the straw man makes an expedient failure on the augmentation (Aikin & Talisse, 2006). A uses the straw man fallacy against B, which underate the objective because a critical discussion needs the two parties to argue receptively to one another.

For the straw man to be fallacy is when an individual brings in a straw man argument that misinterprets to his advantage on an argumentized situation (Aikin & Talisse, 2006).  The critical element of this misinterpretation that differentiates the straw man fallacy from other misinterpretations is that the opponent’s strength is not seen during the argument (Aikin & Talisse, 2006). The straw man fallacy relies upon audience ignorance. For an individual to succussed in using the straw man fallacy, the audience should not know how the opponent responds in such a situation. When the straw man fallacy succeeds, it ensures that the audience is convinced of the right view and the absence of intelligent opposition to it.

 The prevalence of the straw man fallacy subverts argumentation and encourages unreasonable tenacity, which threatens a well-functioning system. This essay has pointed out the unnoticed form of the straw man fallacy. It has also been proved that this form occurs mostly in the political discourse with many effects. Selecting a new term from the straw man fallacy would eradicate this failed reasoning. It is necessary to embrace steps that would rehabilitate the political world from the straw man fallacy.

References.

Aikin, S., & Talisse, R. (2006). Communicationcache.com. Retrieved 25 September 2021, from http://www.communicationcache.com/uploads/1/0/8/8/10887248/two_forms_of_the_straw_man.pdf.

Bizer, G., Kozak, S., & Holterman, L. (2009). The persuasiveness of the straw man rhetorical technique. Social Influence, 4(3), 216-230. https://doi.org/10.1080/15534510802598152