Argumentation

, Volume 25, Issue 1, pp 87–105 | Cite as

Straw Men, Weak Men, and Hollow Men

Article

Abstract

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.

Keywords

Straw man Weak man Fallacy theory 

References

  1. Aikin, Scott., and Caleb, Clanton. Forthcoming. Developing group deliberative virtues. Journal of Applied Philosophy. Google Scholar
  2. Barker, C. 1993. Foundations of bilingual education and bilingualism. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
  3. Baronett, Stan. 2008. Logic. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  4. Bassham, Greg., Irwin. William, Nardone. Henry, and James.M. Wallace. 2002. Critical thinking. Boston: McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
  5. Bickenbach, Jerome.E., and Jaqueline.M. Davies. 1997. Good reasons for better arguments. Orchard Park, NY: Broadview.Google Scholar
  6. Bizer, George.Y., Sirel.M. Kozak, and Leigh.Ann. Holterman. 2009. The persuasiveness of the straw man rhetorical technique. Social Influence 4(3): 216–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Copi, Irving.M., Carl. Cohen, and Daniel.E. Flage. 2007. Essentials of logic, 2nd ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  8. Coulter, Ann. 2002. Slander: Liberal lies about the American right. New York: Three Rivers Press.Google Scholar
  9. Govier, Trudy. 1997. A practical study of argument, 4th ed. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.Google Scholar
  10. Grice, H.P. 1975. Logic and conversation. In Syntax and semantics 3: Speech acts, ed. P. Cole, and J.L. Morgan, 41–58. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  11. Haley, Edward. 2006. Strategies of dominance: The misdirection of US. Baltimore, MD: Foreign Policy. Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Hurley, Patrick. 1994. A concise introduction to logic, 5th ed. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.Google Scholar
  13. Johnson, R., and A. Blair. 1983. Logical self-defence, 2nd ed. Toronto: McGraw-Hill Ryerson.Google Scholar
  14. Lord, Jeffrey. 2007. Iraq and the party of race. The American Spectator. February 16.Google Scholar
  15. Perkins Jr, Ray. 1995. Logic and Mr. Limbaugh. Chicago: Open Court.Google Scholar
  16. Ribeiro, Brian. 2008. How often do we (Philosophy Professors) commit the straw man fallacy? Teaching Philosoiphy 31(1): 27–38.Google Scholar
  17. Rudinow, Joel., and Vincent.E. Barry. 2008. Invitation to critical thinking, 6th ed. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.Google Scholar
  18. Sunstein, Cass. 2009. On rumors. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.Google Scholar
  19. Sunstein, Cass. 2006. Infotopia. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Sunstein, Cass. 2002. The law of group polarization. Journal of Political Philosophy 10(2): 175–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Talisse, Robert., and Scott. Aikin. 2006. Two forms of the straw man. Argumentation 20: 345–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Talisse, Robert., and Yvonne. Raley. 2008. Getting duped: How the media messes with your mind. USA: Scientific American Mind. January/February.Google Scholar
  23. Tindale, Christopher. 2007. Fallacies and argument appraisal. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Van Eemeren, Rob. Frans, Francisca. Grootendorst, and Snoeck. Henkenmans. 2002. Argumentation: Analysis, evaluation, presentation. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  25. Van Eemeren, Frans., and Grootendorst. Rob. 1992. Argumentation, communication, and fallacies. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  26. Van Eemeren, Frans., and Grootendorst. Rob. 2004. A Systematic theory of argumentation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Van Eemeren, Frans., and Peter. Houtlosser. 2007. The contextuality of fallacies. Informal Logic 27: 59–67.Google Scholar
  28. Van Laar, Jan.Peter. 2008. Room for maneuver when raising critical doubt. Philosophy and Rhetoric 41(3): 195–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Vaughn, Lewis. 2008. The power of critical thinking, 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Vernon, T.S., and L.A. Nissen. 1968. Reflective thinking: The fundamentals of logic. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.Google Scholar
  31. Walton, Douglas. 1996. The Straw man fallacy. In Logic and argumentation, ed. Johan. van Bentham, Frans. van Eemeren, Grootendorst. Rob, and Frank. Veltman, 115–128. Amsterdam: Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences, North Holland.Google Scholar
  32. Walton, Douglas., and Eric. Krabbe. 1995. Commitment in dialogue. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Vanderbilt UniversityNashvilleUSA
  2. 2.Northeastern Illinois UniversityChicagoUSA

Personalised recommendations