Ben Shapiro's Fallacious Strategy

Ben Shapiro is a well known right-wing propagandist. I never really knew much about him until I started stumbling over Ben Shapiro videos on YouTube and TikTok. It seems like 95% of the videos I've seen focus on transgendered issues. As I understand it, Shapiro acknowledges their rights but says he has the right to call them whatever he wants (e.g. man or woman).

Many videos feature transgendered people who are so far out there, they look like space aliens. It's obviously hard to support their arguments, which may likewise be wacko.

I think Shapiro's transgender routine can be seen as one big straw man fallacy. Instead of taking on really important issues, like climate change or government corruption, Shapiro picks a target that even many liberals are reluctant to suppor. In addition, the videos are rigged in Shapiro's favor. He engages in cherry picking in choosing not only transgendered people as a topic but selecting individuals who are utterly weird.

The entire spiel can be seen as a red herring, allowing Shapiro to easily score points while diverting attention from more important issues.

In summary, Shapiro is a red herring hitching a free ride on straw man fallacies and cherry picking.

Does this sound like a sound analysis?

I really don't mind (policy-wise) if initial one's post is colored with emotive language and personal opinion. The only problem is, it makes it more difficult to pick out the argument to see if there is a fallacy or not. It also can be seen as poisoning the well , but if our members are influenced by this, shame on them. I don't think any would be.

It seems like 95% of the videos I've seen focus on transgendered issues.

That may be the case, but that is how Google works. If you watch one Shapiro Transgender issue video, you will be shown others. Google thinks this is content you like to watch. From my perspective, I get 90% videos of him talking about religion. Overall, I think Shapiro focuses on any hot button issue of the day in order to stay relevant. A common strategy for any person using social media for notoriety.

He engages in cherry picking in choosing not only transgendered people as a topic but selecting individuals who are utterly weird. 

This is common fallacy / technique. It is best described as the nutpicking fallacy . It could be seen as a more specific version of cherry picking.

In summary, Shapiro is a red herring hitching a free ride on straw man fallacies and cherry picking. 

I never heard of calling a person a fallacy, but perhaps you are just being creative :) I would say that it is important to separate the person from the fallacies they make. Does Shapiro commit these fallacies you mention? In my opinion, yes. But at least with what you presented (specifics), we can only identify one fallacy - the nutpicking fallacy . Feel free to post other examples of specific argument where you think fallacies are being committed by him and we can evaluate those on their own merits.

It may be that Ben Shapiro is guilty of cherry picking and Straw Man in his use of examples.  But I would make 2 observations about what you wrote.  

1).   In assessing someone’s arguments, we should focus on the merits of the arguments made, not attempt to color their arguments by attacking them personally.  You begin by attacking Shapiro as a “well known right wing propagandist.”   How is that relevant to the merits of what he has to say?    Also, whether he is a right wing propagandist is a matter of opinion, not a fact that is “well known.”

2).   You also say:  “I think Shapiro's transgender routine can be seen as one big straw man fallacy.  Instead of taking on really important issues, like climate change or government corruption, Shapiro picks a target that even many liberals are reluctant to suppor.” (sic)

This implies that a commentator should only discuss the issues you feel are important.  In fact, commentators are free to discuss the issues they feel are important, just as you are free to discuss Ben Shapiro even though most people would not say Ben Shapiro is the most important issue around.    

 I noticed President Biden committed the same fallacy this week when he was criticized for not visiting the border during his trip to Arizona.  He responded by saying “there are more important things going on.”  People (Presidents especially) deal with a lot of issues, not just the “most important”, so his answer was a non sequitur.  I would say it’s also a red herring.    

Also, even if there was some kind of rule that people should stick to the most important issues, what does that have to do with “picking a target even many liberals are reluctant to suppor”?

Yeah, sounds pretty accurate to me. Here is a video I recently saw about fallacies and analyzing Ben Shapiro and his new debunking series. https://youtu.be/rNyALe7snCc 

It turns out that when you teach kids chaos they become incredibly anxious. They become incredibly suicidal. This is not any sort of mystery we've known this in Psychology for literally decades. There's nothing new about this. It turns out that the kids more than any other species are prone to Choice Paralysis, and when they are faced with an enormous number of choices and they understand the consequences of none of them and you refuse to teach them the consequences of any of them they become anxious and confused kids.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KTTQQluplRU 6:25

Perhaps you could describe this as Weak Analogy and/or Ambiguous Authority. My understanding is that Choice Paralysis is more related to tasks like picking out tomato sauce in the grocery store. 

Sounds like you're obsessed with Shapiro

The short answer is no. Bo gives a more detailed answer.