|
|
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."
Many of our ideas about the world are based more on feelings than facts, sensibilities than science, and rage than reality. We gravitate toward ideas that make us feel comfortable in areas such as religion, politics, philosophy, social justice, love and sex, humanity, and morality. We avoid ideas that make us feel uncomfortable. This avoidance is a largely unconscious process that affects our judgment and gets in the way of our ability to reach rational and reasonable conclusions. By understanding how our mind works in this area, we can start embracing uncomfortable ideas and be better informed, be more understanding of others, and make better decisions in all areas of life.
* This is for the author's bookstore only. Applies to autographed hardcover, audiobook, and ebook.
