Reverse straw man

From Liberpedia

The reverse straw man fallacy is the opposite of the straw man fallacy. It is also called an iron man fallacy [1] (not to be confused with steel man [2]) or a Motte-and-bailey fallacy[3]. Consider two propositions:

  • A, which is hard to attack ;
  • B, which is easy to attack.

Whereas the straw man fallacy consists in attacking proposition A by attacking instead proposition B, the reverse straw man consists in defending proposition B by defending proposition A.

It’s a form of non sequitur: accepting A would imply to accept B, or a form of equivocation.

In its extreme form (antonym fallacy), proposition B is the exact opposite of A, thus akin to the Schrödinger’s razor fallacy (defending A and non-A at the same time).

The reverse straw man then consists in getting a proposition accepted by arguing in favor of its opposite, by playing on definitions, using intermediate anti-conceptual definitions (definition by non-essentials) or even intellectual package dealings.

Examples

barking cat

borders

examples

imperialism, anti-war

proper government


motte & bailey examples

See also