Simpsons Logical Fallacies: Straw Man Fallacy
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 18 ก.ย. 2024
- colburnclassroo...
Open captions change to closed captions during second half of video. Use of copyrighted content is protected by fair use, which says that copyrighted content can be used so long as commentary is given. Definitions of logical fallacies come from Practical Argument by Laurie G. Kirszner and Stephen R. Mandell.
![CRITICAL THINKING - Fallacies: Straw Man Fallacy [HD]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/hfil34ayaEU/mqdefault.jpg)
Playlist: th-cam.com/video/RnMmXTVOjBY/w-d-xo.html
This is more of a false dilemma than a straw man.
As other comments have said - this isn't a strawman.
A strawman involves substituting an argument presented by your opponent with a deliberately dumbed down or contorted version, then refuting that argument and pretending you addressed what was originally presented.
No - not even that. It's possible to strawman a person who hadn't even spoken by simply putting words into their mouth but your description fails to cover this situation.
Although if it's a point that a lot of people have made when debating the issue in question, it's not a strawman fallacy even if they personally don't
That is literally what Troy does, you're just presuming you need to see the stronger argument of how orange juice is made in the clip and scene. You don't.
@@dthomscappello No, I'm making the point that /someone else has to make the argument/ for you to strawman. Nobody else is claiming you squeeze oranges that way. (The Homer gag aside, of course)
@@countessroadkill9599 no that's not the assumed claim. The assumed claim is "the usual way of making orange juice is suitable". Then the strawman is "you have to use your face to draw juice from the orange, therefore it is not". I see this as a very obvious strawman. I'm sure one could also call it a false dilemma or another fallacy, but that's the thing about fallacies; they can always overlap and coexist in subjective language.
The funny part is, Troy's fake squeezing method is still more effective in the infomertial than actually using the juice loosener.
Mmm yes. The joke. Very informative.
The best thing about this is when Dr. Nick has to shout the line ‘it’s whisper quiet!’.
I don't think this is a straw man fallacy
He’s strawmanning the strawman fallacy
I mean it's how I get juice from an orange
@@Deathnotefan97 That's not strawmanning. You don't know what a "strawman" is
@@fyfyi6053 you don't know what humor is
It's also how I get blood out of a stone.
Even squeezing the orange against your face seems to give you more yield than the juice loosener.
I thought it was about presenting a weaker version of an existing argument to easily refute it. Not just presenting a weak argument alone.
So someone would say: "You have to squeeze oranges to make juice".
It would then be refuted as: "So you said the only way to make juice is to squeeze an orange against your face. Let me show how this is false!"
Now it is attacking a straw man, instead of attacking the actual statement. It wasn't exactly about squeezing the orange against our face, but just squeezing it.
A "weak argument" and a "weaker argument" have different meanings. The latter implies there is a reference argument, which is the one I believed the "straw man" defined.
I'm trying to figure out if my version is just a sub set of yours and if they're both defining the same fallacy.
Sorry I'm late...
I believe this is more of a False Dichotomy/Either-Or Fallacy.
It limits the options to two, when there are actually Many ways to juice an orange.
@@LeoHMIII it's either a strawman fallacy or not a strawman fallacy you have to choose
@@deaconlastname6406 I see what you did there that was nasty lol you should be commended man
“That the farmer probably spit in!”
No immediate examples come to my head, but I feel like there are better examples of strawmen in The Simpsons
I'd say that your definition is more of a relative privation fallacy - comparing something to the worst case scenario to make it seem better. Or it could be a false dilemma - making out that there are only two options when there are more. A strawman fallacy is when you twist someone's argument to make it easier to refute, or else bring up a point they didn't make (although if it's a point that a lot of people have made when debating the issue in question, it's not a strawman fallacy even if they personally didn't)
The part I loved best about that episode is the fact that squashing one orange against your face produces almost 1/2 a glass of juice, and Dr. Nicks machine produces one drop from the whole bag.
The Simpsons are comedy gold! 🤣
But wait there's more: I think I learned something here!
That is not what a strawman is....
yes, yes it is
@@dthomscappelloNo it isn't. A strawman is twisting the other person's argument, or bringing up an argument they didn't make
@@Inkyminkyzizwoz which is what was done, thanks kiddo
@@dthomscappello But the description didn't match that definition. It sounded more like relative privation - trying to make a situation seem better by comparing it to the worst possible scenario
@@Inkyminkyzizwoz I think it qualifies as that as well but it is in fact a weaker version of a presumed claim (the standard way of making orange juice is viable) . I think it would be better to say that it is an inaccurate portrayal of the standard position, rather than "weaker"
This is absolutely not what a strawman argument is.
This isn't a strawman. Close, but not quite. A straw man has to be a weakened version of an existing argument made by one's opponent, one which bears superficial resemblance to what one's opponent says, as a strawman superficially resembles a human. For example, if your opponent says "there's no such thing as a battery which can hold that much power", and you say "my opponent says there's no such thing as a battery!", it's a strawman.
Slightly off-topic but what reasonable person can watch this video without dearly wishing they could watch The President's Neck is Missing?
Orange juice in the eye...😬
Tbh I always thought an invention like the Juice loosener would work better with one orange at a time but in all honesty if squeeze an orange against my face and the juice loosener were the only two options for orange juice….id squeeze the orange against my face.
Thankyou so muchh!! can I use this as my inspiration to do my homework?
I wouldn't since this isn't a strawman
Who would stop you lmao
I'm still waiting for my "Juice Loosener ".....
so how else do you get juice out of an orange?
Do juicers hate juicees by way of their measurement
Thank you!!
So, what is a straw man, and why is he called that, and what's the connection?
Isn't it a false dilemma aka black-or-white ?
strawman?
how did you squeeze juice out of an orange before the great Juice Loosener?
Sorry slick but that isn't what a straw man fallacy is.
I always figured this was a joke which was based on the idea that in the simpsons universe that squeezing juice from an orange was done that way. I don't think it's a logical fallacy because i think in that universe, it's actually the norm (and that's the joke). But whatever, I might be wrong.
If that were true, the part where Homer also juices oranges that way (because he's stupid/gullible) wouldn't be as funny.
Good video. But isn't this the either-or fallacy?
The farmer spits in food?
Straw the man fallacy
is this argumentum af populum?
No but I think I understand what you mean. Ad populum is about stating something to be true because everyone knows it is true.
The straw man can be used to convince the audience instead of convincing the opponent. But only then it could lead to an ad populum. Since the majority may take the straw man's side.
I added my explanation of the staw man in a comment to the video. It's just about altering a statement so it is easier to refute, instead of refutung the statement itself.
Juicero ❤😂
HUUUHHHHHH? 🤔
Sorry Bub but This is not a StrawMan
This is more of a red herring than a strawman
No, it does address the original problem, so it's not a red herring. What it really is is a false dilemma.
These would be much more convincing if they weren't using the very thing in their advertisements that they are supposedly teaching us against. It feels much more like propaganda then they're teaching us something. To a different video, I don't want to show my teacher these ridiculous advertisements.
There are a tonne of straw man arguments used on both sides in the old "religious debates" that used to go on and on over a decade ago. Both camps of the arguments did it endlessly, fighting against the least powerful arguments of the others' position.
Could you give an example of a strawman commonly used by atheists against theists?
@@TallSilentGuyFrom the atheist side - the most common strawman argument is to attack the conservative fundamentalist religious perspective rather than the more nuanced religious views that do exist. From the religious side - the most common strawman argument is to attack a caricature of the atheist position rather than their actual position.
@@TallSilentGuy i didnt kick the soccer ball in the goal. Therfore god doesnt exist
- mister female soccer team guy
P is for psycho 😂
🤦♂️….
Republicans/Trump supporters 101
genius if satire, redditor if serious.
Wrong, a strawman fallacy is a deliberate misrepresentation of your opponents argument in order to attack it instead of their actual argument. You should learn about things before you talk about them.
Much like Andrew Dobson's comics, right?