|
|
Checkers Speech: Straw Man or Red Herring?Would you describe Richard Nixon's 1952 Checkers speech as a straw man fallacy or a simple red herring? Why? Many articles about the straw many fallacy describe it as a two-step process: 1) A propagandists creates a shallow imitation of his opponent's argument (i.e. a "straw man"). 2) The propagandist then knocks his argument down, creating the illusion that he destroyed his opponent's original argument. Most straw man examples clearly illustrate the first step (e.g. introducing Checkers), but I don't see the second step. If we view checkers as a straw man "argument," then how did Nixon knock that particular straw man down? Wikipedia's straw man article calls the Checkers speech a straw man, but I'm voting to call it a red herring. Can anyone tell me why I'm either right or wrong? |
|||
| asked on Saturday, Mar 06, 2021 07:30:18 PM by David Blomstrom | ||||
Top Categories Suggested by Community |
||||
Comments |
||||
| ||||
Want to get notified of all questions as they are asked? Update your mail preferences and turn on "Instant Notification."
Part one is about how science works even when the public thinks it doesn't. Part two will certainly ruffle some feathers by offering a reason- and science-based perspective on issues where political correctness has gone awry. Part three provides some data-driven advice for your health and well-being. Part four looks at human behavior and how we can better navigate our social worlds. In part five we put on our skeptical goggles and critically examine a few commonly-held beliefs. In the final section, we look at a few ways how we all can make the world a better place.
* This is for the author's bookstore only. Applies to autographed hardcover, audiobook, and ebook.
