I notice this a lot with salesmen. Car dealers loans mainly. “If we extend the loan period you’ll save a ton of money monthly” it gets you to think about the money you save per month on the payment and distracts you from realizing that your paying way more in interest.
It is where I come from: Canada. In late high school however, if you mean in elementary school, then I strongly agree. And so should algebra because it trains our ability to think logically and so, makes us better at thinking critically and spotting fallacies.
@@tonyazrael8223 Here in the US it's not. So I envy your country & others that do the same for the populaces public education. I also agree with you that it should be taught at the elementary level. On the topic of algebra however... children need to be taught & master the fundamentals of mathematics before taking on that subject matter. Which takes time & practice in their curriculum over years. So if they can have it incorporated at younger age & be successfully taught, then I absolutely agree with you.
@@GigaWh4tt Not even in High-School? That's very unfortunate. And possibly very damaging to the country in the long run I believe. We've seen what ignorance can do when it affects large numbers: racism, xenophobia, mistrust of medicine (vaccines), crimes, etc. and because of that, I don't believe it's crazy to think that public schools plays a large role in a country's wellbeing. I know it's more complicated than that but at least it's a good start, right? I know I typed "algebra", but in my mind I meant pre-algebra. The reason I said that is because kids between grade 3 and 6 already know how to solve 3 × ? = 12, but it's never formally introduced as a new branch of math to build on, so instead I spent 7 years just doing arithmetics which is a HUGE waste of time considering my peers and I are already familiar with the basic operations by the fourth year.
Q: Why are there two churches located in the same neighborhood across the street from each other? What is one teaching that the other is not? A: Just because there are multiple churches doesn’t mean they aren’t doing anything for the community, not everyone in there is a Christian.
Well yeah, this is basically a misleading statement that attempts to change the subject, while the straw man is misrepresenting the position of the other person...Eg someone says "we must reduce fossil fuels to protect the planet" on TV and some portion of those people might take it as "Oh great, more taxes on car owners" or "Oh no, again our tax money going to useless organizations"...or something like that, basically straw man is misrepresenting someones position to make it easier to attack the "modified argument" while the red herring is more about misleading and "detouring" the argument to another subject
On the question of what is a red herring? Well, it's good to try and answer though questions like these, as when my niece asks why is the sky blue. Speaking of blue let me tell about the sailboat I'm thinking of buying. ( see what I did here, you've just been red herringed)!
*Actually a red herring is when you introduce irrelevant points to distract from the question. You introduced seemingly irrelevant points to answer the question.*
Here is another example. I once argued with an AK47 fan boy on the internet. The fan boy claimed that,"Nobody besides USA uses the M16 platform". I argue back and did my best to debunk him by naming him a list of countries that uses M16 platform. He than responded back by bringing up M16's jamming issues and bring up the topic how AK are so easy to make they can make it in caves.
ThelCombaticon I was wondering the same thing. I do think it falls under the whole Red Herring thing. Media: You colluded with the Russians! Politicians: But what about Hillary's emails?! Which is not the issue here, it's an entirely different one. But it's designed to distract people from the actual topic of discussion, so it sure seems like it fits the description of a Red Herring.
@@elischmitter9711 no, tuquoque is when you accuse the person of doing the same, it doesn't exactly ignore the subject but tries to nullify it through inneficient means. Red herring is when you throw a complete new subject to the table in the attemps to minimize the original subject.
Perhaps I am predisposed to do so, but for past 2+ years I have been hearing increasing number of people respond to questions about trump by attacking Hillary Clinton. Seen it often enough to vaguely recall from my one and only logic class (cir, 1973) that there was a fallacy in those responses, just couldn't remember what it's called.
> Hey Joseph Wu, I spotted some Fallacies of Relevance, and Red Herrings; also seen Proof by Verbosity, and confirmations bias in a BOOK PUBLICATION. The book is titled: " You May Ask Yourself, " 6th Edition, Dalton Conley, W. W. Norton & Company, Inc. Independent Publishers. For Sociology Introduction, for college course. > The book was terribly written and researched, Chapter # 10 (Poverty) was really bad, it gave credit to former President Lyndon B. Johnson, as staring the war on poverty. I did real actual research and findings outside the book publication, President Kennedy, Martin Luther King, Jr, and Johnson Holy Rock (Lakota President). All three of them Initiated the war on Poverty. The book gave no credit to MLK nor Kennedy. A lot of people liked Kennedy, he was a peoples president, a lot of people liked him, African-Americans liked him too. The book should have stated that President Lyndon B. Johnson "continued" the works of MLK and Kennedy. > More info on this publication is chapters # 6 (Social Control and Deviance), # 8 (Gender). Chapter 6, was not written well, it talked as if a person owned another person (ownership chapter), not acceptance. Chapter # 8, used long words to try to confuse people, then going from science it went into Pseudoscience and adhering to gods (mystic power) to prove peoples gender status. Some other problems were 1990s economic boom? -That was a lie people found it hard to get employment because a lot of companies filed chapter 11 bankruptcy such as Steel companies. It also said people gambled over their health between 1900 - 1946 in the industry, people did not have a choice of employment back then. Even thou the book talked about religion, it never got into the deviance of the clergy abuse issue, making them all look immune to justice. Last but not least, JUSTICE, for a sociology book [Sociology ties with pre-law] it did not go over Human Rights, nor Justice such as Crimes Against Humanity. > The book never covered "all groups," two were missing: Veterans (Men and Women) with prestige, and Disabled individuals, both part of society. Those were not included in Sociology. > Book was Paradox, false proposition, false scheme, false offer, false logic. > Got a B+ in course I liked the Sociology intro course, but hated the book. These were good Sociologists: C. Wright Mills, Karl Marx, Max Weber, Jane Addams, and W.E.B. Du Bois were all good, but after them, I thought what happened to Sociology?
I liked Trump's red herring where he made the media focus on wether some lady was trying to offer him sexual favors - instead of focusing on wether she was sexually assualted or whatever.
HISTORY. I realizing more and more, as time goes by, you got these publishers that put a bunch of lies out there and people buy in to that. As time goes by they think people will forget, or some younger generation will not know the truth and be mislead into believing these fallacies. This is why history is so important, to preserve, to teach to reach to upbuild one from within. I'm a Skeptic Nature, optimistic. Every time I see something, I'm like "What are they trying to hide now!?" As teens, We thought we had this settled during the mid to late 1990's (1993-1999), but yet there back again doing things like this "Fallacies." It's even worst now, the History Channel is teaching Aliens from space, the paranormal, etc... .
In your example there is no red herring. Prosecuter says he commited murder plus he tortured the victim while murdering so he should be punished more. İf he killed the victim just with the gun with one shot for example it would be just murder, but since the crime weapon is something that can cause too much pain and the fact that it kills adds more to his crimes. Bad example.
Are red herrings the same logical fallacy as whataboutism-(where someone tries to distract from you point by saying what about and comparing unnecessarily)?
Hi. The term "Begging the question" arose from the tactic of asking an opponent to cede the entire debate question under the guise of ceding a minor point. It is used to refer to circular arguments in which some part of the conclusion is used as a premise. Example: "murder is bad because killing people is wrong."
Reporter: Americans are reportedly still stranded in Afghanistan, and the Taloban's deadline is fast approaching.Will the withdrawal efforts of Americans be still conducted beyond the deadline. Politician: The government is doing everything to get people that wants to get out of the country back to America. Our record breaking withdrawal efforts managed to bring back almost a thousand americans and refugees in just one day. Is this red herring??
Interesting video. (Maybe improve the animation by not typing words one letter at a time which is too slow and distracting compare to our reading speed..) So, how do we counter or diffuse such fallacies once we're aware of it?
Actually we don't call it philosophy all fallacies categories in speech knowledge and real philosophy we call wisdom ,apparantly in west you call both plosephy
"Straw Man Fallacy" is restructuring/rewording an opposing argument to simplify & be easily taken down. A "Red Herring" is adding irrelevant info to the argument to avoid the original subject. The confusion of the two, I think, comes from the fact that both have the same intention (i.e. to misdirect), but different approaches to misdirect. Plus "Red Herrings" try to get you to jump to conclusions by skipping a step in critical thinking. Hope this helped!!
05:15 - "As a result, it becomes extremely difficult to criticize the argument when it is so difficult to identify." Ohhhhhhh my god, welcome to my fuckin relationship...
Pseudoscience does not equal Real Science. Next time the " SCHOOL BOARD " wants to replace Science with opinion, Help put an end to the folly of BALANCED SCIENCE. These 4 books are good to read: "the Demon Haunted World, Science as a Candle in the Dark," by Carl Sagan. Flim Flam by James Randi. Mark Twain's The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn. And also, Skeptoid.
"Straw Man Fallacy" is restructuring/rewording an opposing argument to simplify & be easily taken down. A "Red Herring" is adding irrelevant info to the argument to avoid the original subject. The confusion of the two, I think, comes from the fact that both have the same intention (i.e. to misdirect), but different approaches to misdirect. Plus "Red Herrings" try to get you to jump to conclusions by skipping a step in critical thinking. Hope this helped!!
![CRITICAL THINKING - Fallacies: Ad Hominem [HD]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/qBkj-AYYg7w/mqdefault.jpg)
I notice this a lot with salesmen. Car dealers loans mainly. “If we extend the loan period you’ll save a ton of money monthly” it gets you to think about the money you save per month on the payment and distracts you from realizing that your paying way more in interest.
Does anyone else think that spotting logical fallacies should be taught in public schools?
Yeeeeeeees!!!!!!!
It is where I come from: Canada. In late high school however, if you mean in elementary school, then I strongly agree. And so should algebra because it trains our ability to think logically and so, makes us better at thinking critically and spotting fallacies.
@@tonyazrael8223 Here in the US it's not. So I envy your country & others that do the same for the populaces public education. I also agree with you that it should be taught at the elementary level. On the topic of algebra however... children need to be taught & master the fundamentals of mathematics before taking on that subject matter. Which takes time & practice in their curriculum over years. So if they can have it incorporated at younger age & be successfully taught, then I absolutely agree with you.
@@GigaWh4tt Not even in High-School? That's very unfortunate. And possibly very damaging to the country in the long run I believe. We've seen what ignorance can do when it affects large numbers: racism, xenophobia, mistrust of medicine (vaccines), crimes, etc. and because of that, I don't believe it's crazy to think that public schools plays a large role in a country's wellbeing. I know it's more complicated than that but at least it's a good start, right?
I know I typed "algebra", but in my mind I meant pre-algebra. The reason I said that is because kids between grade 3 and 6 already know how to solve 3 × ? = 12, but it's never formally introduced as a new branch of math to build on, so instead I spent 7 years just doing arithmetics which is a HUGE waste of time considering my peers and I are already familiar with the basic operations by the fourth year.
We are taught in Philippines, and we are taught various philosophical school of thought as well
"clearly one's dislike of pizza is irrelevant to one's political abilities"I wouldn't be so sure.
Teenage ninja turtles also think like you.
Pineapple belongs on pizza.
Q: Why are there two churches located in the same neighborhood across the street from each other? What is one teaching that the other is not?
A: Just because there are multiple churches doesn’t mean they aren’t doing anything for the community, not everyone in there is a Christian.
Just curious, but wouldn't that be considered the straw man fallacy?
@@jameshouck1605 Yes it would be. This is straw man, creating a counterargument that never existed.
Isn't it similar to an extent to strawman fallacy? Especially on 'answering the wrong question'.
I'd say yes. They are similar except the strawman is a "counterargument," and the red herring is an "argument" itself
Well yeah, this is basically a misleading statement that attempts to change the subject, while the straw man is misrepresenting the position of the other person...Eg someone says "we must reduce fossil fuels to protect the planet" on TV and some portion of those people might take it as "Oh great, more taxes on car owners" or "Oh no, again our tax money going to useless organizations"...or something like that, basically straw man is misrepresenting someones position to make it easier to attack the "modified argument" while the red herring is more about misleading and "detouring" the argument to another subject
@@Zekrom569... Agree. The strawman focuses attention on a spot, the red herring loosely points "somewhere"... :)
On the question of what is a red herring? Well, it's good to try and answer though questions like these, as when my niece asks why is the sky blue. Speaking of blue let me tell about the sailboat I'm thinking of buying. ( see what I did here, you've just been red herringed)!
*Actually a red herring is when you introduce irrelevant points to distract from the question. You introduced seemingly irrelevant points to answer the question.*
Here is another example. I once argued with an AK47 fan boy on the internet. The fan boy claimed that,"Nobody besides USA uses the M16 platform". I argue back and did my best to debunk him by naming him a list of countries that uses M16 platform. He than responded back by bringing up M16's jamming issues and bring up the topic how AK are so easy to make they can make it in caves.
when most of the claims in Judge Judy are literally red herrings.
*"literally?"*
woah i just found this channel. pretty cool!
So basically it is a distraction, and redirection of a debate, or question?
And often followed up with a straw man...to lend it some credibility.
@@rklewis2 can you elaborate on the strawman connected to red herring? Thanks
would you agree that the first example is also an example of an appeal to emotion fallacy?
I think so
Would the fallacy of Whataboutism fall under Red Herring? Or would it fall under the broader Fallacies of Relevance category?
TheICombaticon I think whataboutism falls under appeal to hypocrisy or to queue. Which is under the fallacies of relevance.
ThelCombaticon I was wondering the same thing. I do think it falls under the whole Red Herring thing. Media: You colluded with the Russians! Politicians: But what about Hillary's emails?!
Which is not the issue here, it's an entirely different one. But it's designed to distract people from the actual topic of discussion, so it sure seems like it fits the description of a Red Herring.
defintely red herring
@@elischmitter9711 no, tuquoque is when you accuse the person of doing the same, it doesn't exactly ignore the subject but tries to nullify it through inneficient means. Red herring is when you throw a complete new subject to the table in the attemps to minimize the original subject.
Perhaps I am predisposed to do so, but for past 2+ years I have been hearing increasing number of people respond to questions about trump by attacking Hillary Clinton. Seen it often enough to vaguely recall from my one and only logic class (cir, 1973) that there was a fallacy in those responses, just couldn't remember what it's called.
Unfortunately it goes the same in reverse too. The left will often try to place blame on Trump when asked about their own policies and shortcomings.
They need to start labelling fallacies under broader categories more often. It would make them easier to remember.
My favorite red herring: "Vikings didn't have horned helmets. They would have been impractical in battle."
If it doesnt fit, u must acquit = red herring?
Bro Grady, them boxes are kinda fire 🔥🔥🔥
Ok, I was going to ask you to do one on the relevance of University studies. Geuss you covered it.
> Hey Joseph Wu, I spotted some Fallacies of Relevance, and Red Herrings; also seen Proof by Verbosity, and confirmations bias in a BOOK PUBLICATION. The book is titled: " You May Ask Yourself, " 6th Edition, Dalton Conley, W. W. Norton & Company, Inc. Independent Publishers. For Sociology Introduction, for college course.
> The book was terribly written and researched, Chapter # 10 (Poverty) was really bad, it gave credit to former President Lyndon B. Johnson, as staring the war on poverty. I did real actual research and findings outside the book publication, President Kennedy, Martin Luther King, Jr, and Johnson Holy Rock (Lakota President). All three of them Initiated the war on Poverty. The book gave no credit to MLK nor Kennedy. A lot of people liked Kennedy, he was a peoples president, a lot of people liked him, African-Americans liked him too. The book should have stated that President Lyndon B. Johnson "continued" the works of MLK and Kennedy.
> More info on this publication is chapters # 6 (Social Control and Deviance), # 8 (Gender). Chapter 6, was not written well, it talked as if a person owned another person (ownership chapter), not acceptance. Chapter # 8, used long words to try to confuse people, then going from science it went into Pseudoscience and adhering to gods (mystic power) to prove peoples gender status. Some other problems were 1990s economic boom? -That was a lie people found it hard to get employment because a lot of companies filed chapter 11 bankruptcy such as Steel companies. It also said people gambled over their health between 1900 - 1946 in the industry, people did not have a choice of employment back then. Even thou the book talked about religion, it never got into the deviance of the clergy abuse issue, making them all look immune to justice. Last but not least, JUSTICE, for a sociology book [Sociology ties with pre-law] it did not go over Human Rights, nor Justice such as Crimes Against Humanity.
> The book never covered "all groups," two were missing: Veterans (Men and Women) with prestige, and Disabled individuals, both part of society. Those were not included in Sociology.
> Book was Paradox, false proposition, false scheme, false offer, false logic.
> Got a B+ in course I liked the Sociology intro course, but hated the book. These were good Sociologists: C. Wright Mills, Karl Marx, Max Weber, Jane Addams, and W.E.B. Du Bois were all good, but after them, I thought what happened to Sociology?
All political wings have come together here in this video
I liked Trump's red herring where he made the media focus on wether some lady was trying to offer him sexual favors - instead of focusing on wether she was sexually assualted or whatever.
HISTORY. I realizing more and more, as time goes by, you got these publishers that put a bunch of lies out there and people buy in to that. As time goes by they think people will forget, or some younger generation will not know the truth and be mislead into believing these fallacies. This is why history is so important, to preserve, to teach to reach to upbuild one from within.
I'm a Skeptic Nature, optimistic. Every time I see something, I'm like "What are they trying to hide now!?"
As teens, We thought we had this settled during the mid to late 1990's (1993-1999), but yet there back again doing things like this "Fallacies." It's even worst now, the History Channel is teaching Aliens from space, the paranormal, etc...
.
Thank you for this
everyone in the comments who's grandparents go off on random tangents after being asked a question
Whiskey from Ireland, whisky from Scotland. Was this a red herring? :-)
In your example there is no red herring. Prosecuter says he commited murder plus he tortured the victim while murdering so he should be punished more. İf he killed the victim just with the gun with one shot for example it would be just murder, but since the crime weapon is something that can cause too much pain and the fact that it kills adds more to his crimes. Bad example.
Yep. 👍
Is this also a non sequiter argument?
Can you use this fallacy when presenting your argument to a group who is not educated about this sort of thing?
thee biggest *red* *heron* of all red herrings
DOES ANYONE HAVE A SPECIfic example of a red herring in media or debate
Are red herrings the same logical fallacy as whataboutism-(where someone tries to distract from you point by saying what about and comparing unnecessarily)?
Could this also be a form of begging the question?
Hi. The term "Begging the question" arose from the tactic of asking an opponent to cede the entire debate question under the guise of ceding a minor point. It is used to refer to circular arguments in which some part of the conclusion is used as a premise.
Example: "murder is bad because killing people is wrong."
Reporter: Americans are reportedly still stranded in Afghanistan, and the Taloban's deadline is fast approaching.Will the withdrawal efforts of Americans be still conducted beyond the deadline.
Politician: The government is doing everything to get people that wants to get out of the country back to America. Our record breaking withdrawal efforts managed to bring back almost a thousand americans and refugees in just one day.
Is this red herring??
I would say yes
the red herring is usually easy to spot, you just used a crappy example therefore giving the impression that it is hard to spot.
Interesting video. (Maybe improve the animation by not typing words one letter at a time which is too slow and distracting compare to our reading speed..) So, how do we counter or diffuse such fallacies once we're aware of it?
Mikel Bogars point out their fallacies
Do condemn Hamas? Is a red herring
read red heron herrin' hearin' . its as deep as it is simple
Omg , I do that all the time .
Am I wrong to say that most examples given in this video are also guilty of "Straw Man" fallacy ?
Our president loves committing red herring and equivocation fallacies.
I'm from the Philippines and I'm talking about Duterte.
@Run, Jack. Run. not these days, it always was. Our minds are very suseptible to fallacies.
False dilemma? Not liking pizza does in fact disqualify one from being fit for public office.
The closest fallacy to a red herring is the straw man fallacy. Both are fallacies of relevance.
Last example? Throw out like 8 topics in every sentence. It's a way to glean interest from a date. -still single
US house of representatives loves red herrings
So this includes whataboutism?
If he's drinking whiskey, he's been to Ireland, not Scotland. They drink whisky there.
Red herring: "Trump, why wont you disavow white supremacy?"
Think about that for a minute...
why the captions are in Korean?
Cause Mr. Wu is Korean himself?
Actually we don't call it philosophy all fallacies categories in speech knowledge and real philosophy we call wisdom ,apparantly in west you call both plosephy
People do this way too much with me and it's so annoying
I-im still confused
You should rename this channel to "reddit philosophy"
It is the same guy from the slipper slope fallacy video (a video in which reddit tore apart). The narrator just isn't that great of an explainer.
I'm continually confusing redherring for the straw man fallacy.
Laugh if you want, but this very argument 4:08 actually won people when Trump ate pizza in NYC wrong once.
What is the difference from straw man fallacy then ?
"Straw Man Fallacy" is restructuring/rewording an opposing argument to simplify & be easily taken down. A "Red Herring" is adding irrelevant info to the argument to avoid the original subject. The confusion of the two, I think, comes from the fact that both have the same intention (i.e. to misdirect), but different approaches to misdirect. Plus "Red Herrings" try to get you to jump to conclusions by skipping a step in critical thinking. Hope this helped!!
@@GigaWh4tt thank you
Jordan Peterson uses this A LOT.
05:15 - "As a result, it becomes extremely difficult to criticize the argument when it is so difficult to identify."
Ohhhhhhh my god, welcome to my fuckin relationship...
Why is my poop red
Haha that’s a spot on Trump impersonation.
To be honest, it describes all politicians, from all parties.
Pseudoscience does not equal Real Science. Next time the " SCHOOL BOARD " wants to replace Science with opinion, Help put an end to the folly of BALANCED SCIENCE.
These 4 books are good to read: "the Demon Haunted World, Science as a Candle in the Dark," by Carl Sagan. Flim Flam by James Randi. Mark Twain's The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn. And also, Skeptoid.
Aka Ben Shapiro
Haha I was just thinking the same
I thought all politicians love pizza ...
I see what you did there....
Sounds like my ex
Donuld Trumps campaign, all in one video!
Oh I’m not brave enough for politics
Donald Trump is a walking, talking, red herring. 😲😶😆
Isn't this just basically the strawman fallacy?
"Straw Man Fallacy" is restructuring/rewording an opposing argument to simplify & be easily taken down. A "Red Herring" is adding irrelevant info to the argument to avoid the original subject. The confusion of the two, I think, comes from the fact that both have the same intention (i.e. to misdirect), but different approaches to misdirect. Plus "Red Herrings" try to get you to jump to conclusions by skipping a step in critical thinking. Hope this helped!!
@@GigaWh4tt Thanks man.