Straw Men, Iron Men, and Argumentative Virtue

@article{Aikin2016StrawMI,
  title={Straw Men, Iron Men, and Argumentative Virtue},
  author={Scott F Aikin and John Casey},
  journal={Topoi},
  year={2016},
  volume={35},
  pages={431-440}
}
The straw man fallacy consists in inappropriately constructing or selecting weak (or comparatively weaker) versions of the opposition’s arguments. We will survey the three forms of straw men recognized in the literature, the straw, weak, and hollow man. We will then make the case that there are examples of inappropriately reconstructing stronger versions of the opposition’s arguments. Such cases we will call iron man fallacies. The difference between appropriate and inappropriate iron manning… 
Metalinguistic disagreements, underdetermination and the straw man fallacy: toward meaning argumentativism
The goal of this paper is to critically analyze some of the dubious assumptions about language and meaning hidden in the dominant accounts of the straw man fallacy. I will argue that against the
Fooling the Victim: Of Straw Men and Those Who Fall for Them
abstract:This paper contributes to the debate about the strawman fallacy. It is the received view that strawmen are employed to fool not the arguer whose argument they distort, but instead a third
Intellectual humility and argumentation
  • Andrew Aberdein
  • Philosophy
    The Routledge Handbook of Philosophy of Humility
  • 2020
In this chapter I argue that intellectual humility is related to argumentation in several distinct but mutually supporting ways. I begin by drawing connections between humility and two topics of
Do People Perceive the Disagreement in Straw Man Fallacies? An Experimental Investigation
So far, experimental studies on the straw man have targeted the misrepresentational dimension of this fallacy. In order to provide a more detailed understanding of the way the straw man is perceived,
Connectives and Straw Men. Experimental approach on French and English
In this paper, we present experiments designed to assess the role of causal connectives with an attributive meaning (e.g. since and puisque) on the acceptability of straw man fallacies. Our results
Why We Need Skepticism in Argument: Skeptical Engagement as a Requirement for Epistemic Justice
The Argumentative Adversariality debate is over the question of whether argument must be adversarial. A particular locus of this debate is on skeptical challenges in critical dialogue. The Default
Charity for moral reasons? – A defense of the principle of charity in argumentation
Abstract In this paper I argue for a pro tanto moral duty to be charitable in argument. Further, I argue that the amount of charitable effort required varies depending on the type of dialogue arguers
Principle of Charity as a Moral Requirement in Non-Institutionalized Argumentation
In this paper, I argue for an interpretation of the principle of charity as a moral requirement on arguers. The requirement to respect others as reasonable beings capable of having and understanding
Bothsiderism
This paper offers an account of a fallacy we will call bothsiderism , which is to mistake disagreement on an issue for evidence that either a compromise on, suspension of judgment regarding, or
...
...

References

SHOWING 1-10 OF 20 REFERENCES
How Often Do We (Philosophy Professors) Commit the Straw Man Fallacy
In a recent paper (in Argumentation, 2006) Robert Talisse and Scott Aikin suggest that we ought to recognize two distinct forms of the straw man fallacy. In addition to misrepresenting the strength
Straw Men, Weak Men, and Hollow Men
Three forms of the straw man fallacy are posed: the straw, weak, and hollow man. Additionally, there can be non-fallacious cases of any of these species of straw man arguments.
Towards a Critique-Friendly Approach to the Straw Man Fallacy Evaluation
In this article I address the following question: When are reformulations in argumentative criticisms reasonable and when do they become fallacious straw men? Following ideas developed in the
The persuasiveness of the straw man rhetorical technique
The straw man technique takes place when an opponent's argument or position is distorted or oversimplified so that it can easily be refuted. Two experiments assessed the technique's effectiveness.
The political value of humility
This article takes up the issue of deliberation and the importance of internal constraints for the proper functioning of a deliberative environment. Those who seek to engage in deliberation must
Fallacies and Argument Appraisal
1. Introduction to the study of fallaciousness 2. Fallacies of diversion 3. Fallacies of structure 4. Problems with language 5. Ad Hominem arguments 6. Other 'Ad' arguments 7. The Ad Verecundiam and
Holding One’s Own
There is a tension with regard to regulative norms of inquiry. One’s commitments must survive critical scrutiny, and if they do not survive, they should be revised. Alternately, for views to be
Is It Good to Be Open-Minded?
Although open-mindedness is still widely regarded as an intellectual virtue and an aim of education, it is also commonly held that this attitude carries with it certain implications that ultimately
Wrenching from Context: The Manipulation of Commitments
This article analyses the fallacy of wrenching from context, using the dialectical notions of commitment and implicature as tools. The data, a set of key examples, is used to sharpen the conceptual
...
...