Accused of a fallacy? Suspect a fallacy? Ask Dr. Bo and the community!

Quickly register to comment, ask and respond to questions, and get FREE access to our passive online course on cognitive biases!
Register!

one moment please...



Red Herring

Ignoratio elenchi

(also known as: beside the point, misdirection [form of], changing the subject, false emphasis, the Chewbacca defense, irrelevant conclusion, irrelevant thesis, clouding the issue, ignorance of refutation)

Description: Attempting to redirect the argument to another issue to which the person doing the redirecting can better respond. While it is similar to the avoiding the issue fallacy, the red herring is a deliberate diversion of attention with the intention of trying to abandon the original argument.

Logical Form:

Argument A is presented by person 1.

Person 2 introduces argument B.

Argument A is abandoned.

Example #1:

Mike: It is morally wrong to cheat on your spouse, why on earth would you have done that?

Ken: But what is morality exactly?

Mike: It’s a code of conduct shared by cultures.

Ken: But who creates this code?...

Explanation: Ken has successfully derailed this conversation off of his sexual digressions to the deep, existential, discussion on morality.

Example #2:

Billy: How could the universe be 6000 years old when we know the speed of light, the distance of astronomical objects (13+ billion light years away), and the fact that the light has reached us[1]?

Marty: 6000 years is not a firm number.  The universe can be as old as about 10,000 years.

Billy: How do you figure that?...

Explanation: Marty has succeeded in avoiding the devastating question by introducing a new topic for debate... shifting the young-earth creation timeline where it does not necessarily coincide with the Bible.

Exception: Using a red herring to divert attention away from your opponent's red herring, might work, but do two wrongs make a right?

Tip: Impress your friends by telling them that there is no such fish species as a "red herring;" rather it refers to a particularly pungent fish—typically a herring but not always—that has been strongly cured in brine and/or heavily smoked.

References:

Hurley, P. J. (2011). A Concise Introduction to Logic. Cengage Learning.

[1]The most distant object yet confirmed in the universe is a self-destructing star that exploded 13.1 billion light years from Earth. The object is a gamma-ray burst (GRB) – the brightest type of stellar explosion.  The burst is dubbed GRB 090423 for the date of its discovery.



Registered User Comments

Jason Mathias
Monday, November 18, 2019 - 10:15:11 AM
Person 1 presents argument A.
Person 2 responds with argument B.
Person 1 points out fallacies in argument B by name (including a red-herring) and describes them in logical form.
Person 2 responds with, "nice red-herrings"

Is pointing out logical fallacies in a persons argument a red-herring?

login to reply
4 replies
0 votes
 
Reply To Comment
working...
 

Bo Bennett, PhD
Monday, November 18, 2019 - 11:50:59 AM
Perhaps in some meta-sense... but for the most part, no. People point out fallacies mostly for reasons other than derailing the argument. Intent does matter here.

login to reply
 
0 votes
 
Reply To Comment
working...
 

Jason Mathias
Monday, November 18, 2019 - 01:15:18 PM
@Bo Bennett, PhD:

It seems like a paradox that pointing out a fallacy is a fallacy. The paradox of fallacies killing themselves out of useful existence.

If its a fallacy in a meta sense then that would make fallacies a contradiction in a meta sense as well, would it not?

login to reply
 
0 votes
 
Reply To Comment
working...
 

Bo Bennett, PhD
Monday, November 18, 2019 - 01:40:05 PM
@Jason Mathias : Again, intent. Red herring is about derailing the argument. Pointing out a fallacy is one of the many possible ways to do this. Pointing out a red herring to get the argument back on track is not a fallacy.

login to reply
 
0 votes
 
Reply To Comment
working...
 

Jason Mathias
Monday, November 18, 2019 - 01:46:36 PM
@Bo Bennett, PhD:

Ok, got it. Yes, I only use them to get the argument back on track.

Thank you

login to reply
 
0 votes
 
Reply To Comment
working...

Anthony
Friday, October 20, 2017 - 12:05:37 PM
I do not fully agree with you as for the second example. Yes, Ken does change the subject, but that doesn't make it fallacious. Sometimes it is needed to clear things up(elucidate) or understand where someone is coming from first, before touching upon the crux of his/her argument.

login to reply
3 replies
3 votes
 
Reply To Comment
working...
 

Bo Bennett, PhD
Friday, October 20, 2017 - 12:13:16 PM
Understood. The assumption in the examples is that the initial question is never addressed. That is what makes it fallacious.

login to reply
 
4 votes
 
Reply To Comment
working...
 

Alex johnson
Saturday, July 27, 2019 - 09:26:39 PM
Altering the time period to 10000 from 6000 moves the argument away from the Bible. That move also constitutes another type of fallacy - figure it out. Further more , on the scale of light travel and time , another 4000 years does nothing to prove his point. Since we can see galaxies that are billions of years old ! - A better response, is this example, even thought it’s still sophistry , “ the speed of light is based on science which is often proved wrong.”
You must be blind

login to reply
 
0 votes
 
Reply To Comment
working...
 

Alex johnson
Saturday, July 27, 2019 - 10:06:20 PM
Altering the time period to 10000 from 6000 moves the argument away from the Bible. That move also constitutes the another type of fallacy - figure it out. Further more , on the scale of light travel and time , another 4000 years does nothing to prove his point. Since we can see galaxies that are billions of years old ! - A better response, is this example, even thought it’s still sophistry , “ the speed of light is based on science which is often proved wrong.”
You must be blind

login to reply
 
0 votes
 
Reply To Comment
working...

Jeremy Hinken
Tuesday, February 26, 2019 - 12:03:48 PM
Example #2 is interesting because in Nov. 2016, an article published in Physics Review D offers excellent evidence for the theory of Variable Light Speed, which states that light has significantly slowed down from almost instantaneous at the beginning of our universe to what we now observe. It would completely turn physics on its head and change the dates of everything.

login to reply
0 replies
0 votes
 
Reply To Comment
working...

George Shirewill
Friday, September 07, 2018 - 08:14:18 PM
Quite interesting. Much appreciated Bo Bennett!

login to reply
0 replies
0 votes
 
Reply To Comment
working...


Become a Logical Fallacy Master. Choose Your Poison.

Logically Fallacious is one of the most comprehensive collections of logical fallacies with all original examples and easy to understand descriptions; perfect for educators, debaters, or anyone who wants to improve his or her reasoning skills.

Get the book, Logically Fallacious by Bo Bennett, PhD by selecting one of the following options:


Not Much of a Reader? No Problem!

Enroll in the Mastering Logical Fallacies Online Course. Over 10 hours of video and interactive learning. Go beyond the book!

Enroll in the Fallacy-A-Day Passive Course. Sit back and learn fallacies the easy way—in just a few minutes per day, via e-mail delivery.

Have a podcast or know someone who does? Putting on a conference? Dr. Bennett is available for interviews and public speaking events. Contact him directly here.


About Archieboy Holdings, LLC. Privacy Policy Other Books Written by Bo
 Website Software Copyright 2019, Archieboy Holdings, LLC.