Pro-vaxxer - there is no evidence that aluminum is linked to autism.Explore the different types of fallacies you can find through examples. They derive from reasoning that is logically incorrect, thus undermining an argument's validity. Originally, scholars thought that this idiom originated from a. In logic and rhetoric, a red herring is an observation that draws attention away from the central issue in an argument or discussion an informal logical fallacy.It is also called a 'decoy. Fallacies are mistaken beliefs based on unsound arguments. The process turns the fish’s flesh dark red and gives it a powerfully pungent smell.

Rather, it’s a name given to a type of dried fish (typically herring) that is either smoked or brined. A red herring fallacy is used to distract someone from the central topic of discussion, and mislead the individual to a completely different direction.

Anti-vaxxer - there’s aluminum in vaccines. First off, there’s actually no such fish as a red herring.

Pro-vaxxer - there is no evidence in hundreds of studies that vaccines are linked to autism.

A red herring argument often used would take this form: What Aboutism Scenario: A couple are arguing. Today, we use the metaphor to explain any situation where someone tries to distract people from the true issue at hand. Example of a red herringĪnti-vaccine activists use this quite a bit in their arguments about the safety and effectiveness of vaccines. The strong smell of the herring fish to distract dogs from chasing rabbits. This sort of “reasoning” is fallacious because changing the topic of discussion does not count as an argument against a claim - once again, the only point that should matter in an argument is the quality and the quantity of evidence.

Topic B is introduced under the guise of being relevant to topic A, even though topic B has no relevance to topic A.

The red herring “reasoning” uses the following steps: This fallacy is somewhat related to the non sequitur. Martinez, the Second Circuit accepted the governments characterization of defendants baseless argument that government witnesses were. The arguer then makes the claim of “winning” the argument by directing the argument from the initial topic to another, often unrelated topic. The red herring logical fallacy, probably named after an English philosopher who used kipper (a strong-smelling smoked fish) to throw hounds off the scent of the rabbit, is an argument style in which an irrelevant topic is presented in an attempt to divert the argument from the original issue.

An example of red herring fallacy