Straw Man

[Aye Bay Bay]

Can someone please explain to me the Straw Man concept?

[hard]

well from what i know, it's basically trying to sue someone who has no possession of value to remedy your losses. that's in legal terms btw.

[costargh]

I don't think that's the context he meant.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

[hard]

oh sorry, didn't know what context you meant. thanks for correcting me costa

[Mao]

straw man is usually a misinterpretation of someone else's view/stance (can be deliberate), thus making it easier to refute

[Collin Li]

An intentional straw-man best demonstrates the name:

Someone who intentionally wants to dismiss someone's argument without addressing it will set up a "straw man's argument," attribute it to his opponent, and refute it, rather than attacking the argument in question.

It is called a "straw man" because no one actually argued for it, it was invented. To integrate this charge of fallacious logic into a sentence, you could say: "Only a straw-man made that argument, not me." "The only idea you refuted was the straw-man's argument."

[Aye Bay Bay]

So lets say person A presents their view, person B shall present a distorted version of person A's view and attack the distorted view and not the actual view that person A was presenting. Is that a "Straw Man"? How would a straw man be effective?

[Mao]

So lets say person A presents their view, person B shall present a distorted version of person A's view and attack the distorted view and not the actual view that person A was presenting. Is that a "Straw Man"? How would a straw man be effective?

yes, that is a straw man

and no, it's not effective at all, but people do it all the time

[Collin Li]

A straw-man is a logical fallacy where the logic may be correct, but the premise is wrong (what person A actually condones). So, it is useless.

[Aye Bay Bay]

Oh okay, I get it.
Thanks guys!

[/0]

Can straw-men arguments exist without an initial argument.. or would you call that something else?

[Collin Li]

Logical fallacies might not be mutually exclusive. So that article (in News & Politics) which was an all out attack on libertarianism was a mixture of generalisation and straw-man.