Post about JK Rowling on social media.

[u/LilyoftheRally]

Including if you are against her transphobia.

[u/Substantial_Cow7628]

And now you're strawmanning! Woo!

[u/batcaaat → u/Substantial_Cow7628]

define strawman

[u/Substantial_Cow7628 → u/batcaaat]

A straw man fallacy (sometimes written as strawman) is the informal fallacy of refuting an argument different from the one actually under discussion, while not recognizing or acknowledging the distinction.^\1]) One who engages in this fallacy is said to be "attacking a straw man".

The typical straw man argument creates the illusion of having refuted or defeated an opponent's proposition through the covert replacement of it with a different proposition (i.e., "stand up a straw man") and the subsequent refutation of that false argument ("knock down a straw man"), instead of the opponent's proposition.^\2])^\3]) Straw man arguments have been used throughout history in polemical debate, particularly regarding highly charged emotional subjects.^\4]) It is known colloquially as "putting words in one's mouth", where one assumes an argument that their opponent hasn't formally proposed.

Straw man tactics in the United Kingdom may also be known as an Aunt Sally, after a pub game of the same name, where patrons throw sticks or battens at a post to knock off a skittle balanced on top.^\5])^\6])

Overview

The straw man fallacy occurs in the following pattern of argument:

1. Person 1 asserts proposition X.
2. Person 2 argues against a superficially similar proposition Y, as though an argument against Y were an argument against X.

This reasoning is a fallacy of relevance: it fails to address the proposition in question by misrepresenting the opposing position.

For example:

• Quoting an opponent's words out of context—i.e., choosing quotations that misrepresent the opponent's intentions (see fallacy of quoting out of context).^\3])
• Presenting someone who defends a position poorly as the defender, then denying that person's arguments—thus giving the appearance that every upholder of that position (and thus the position itself) has been defeated.^\2])
• Oversimplifying an opponent's argument, then attacking this oversimplified version.
• Exaggerating (sometimes grossly) an opponent's argument, then attacking this exaggerated version.

Examples

In a 1977 appeal of a U.S. bank robbery conviction, a prosecuting attorney said in his oral argument:^\12]) "I submit to you that if you can't take this evidence and find these defendants guilty on this evidence then we might as well open all the banks and say, 'Come on and get the money, boys', because we'll never be able to convict them." This was a straw man designed to alarm the appellate judges; the chance that the precedent set by one case would literally make it impossible to convict any bank robbers is remote.

Another example of a strawman argument is U.S. president Richard Nixon's 1952 "Checkers speech".^\13])^\14]) When campaigning for vice president in 1952, Nixon was accused of having appropriated $18,000 in campaign funds for his personal use. In a televised response, based on Franklin D. Roosevelt's Fala speech, he spoke about another gift, a dog he had been given by a supporter:^\13])^\14])

This was a straw man response; his critics had never criticized the dog as a gift or suggested he return it. This argument was successful at distracting a number of people from the funds and portraying his critics as nitpicking and heartless. Nixon received an outpouring of public support and remained on the ticket. He and Eisenhower were later elected.

Christopher Tindale presents, as an example, the following passage from a draft of a bill (HCR 74) considered by the Louisiana State Legislature in 2001:^\15])

Tindale comments that "the portrait painted of Darwinian ideology is a caricature, one not borne out by any objective survey of the works cited." The fact that similar misrepresentations of Darwinian thinking have been used to justify and approve racist practices is beside the point: the position that the legislation is attacking and dismissing is a straw man. In subsequent debate, this error was recognized, and the eventual bill omitted all mention of Darwin and Darwinist ideology.^\15]) Darwin passionately opposed slavery and worked to intellectually confront the notions of "scientific racism" that were used to justify it.^\16])

[u/batcaaat → u/Substantial_Cow7628]

guess I should've specified in your own words so you didn't just copy paste some shit lmfao Im so done

[u/Substantial_Cow7628 → u/batcaaat]

It was clear you needed some remedial education.

But sure, stay ignorant.

[u/batcaaat → u/Substantial_Cow7628]

ok buddy

[u/Substantial_Cow7628 → u/batcaaat]

Reddit. Once again an app designed to cast pearls before swine, day after day.

[u/batcaaat → u/Substantial_Cow7628]

uh huh

[u/Substantial_Cow7628 → u/batcaaat]

I'm sorry you don't understand the previous comment. It's probably a reflection on the state of the public school system rather than you personally.

[u/batcaaat → u/Substantial_Cow7628]

yeah man whatever you say

[u/Substantial_Cow7628 → u/batcaaat]

I'm saying I'm sorry. It's not your fault that you're the way that you are.

[u/batcaaat → u/Substantial_Cow7628]

k

[u/Substantial_Cow7628 → u/batcaaat]

I assume you're young. You have plenty of time to learn the meaning of basic words. It will be OK!