Video Transcript: Strawman and Argument Appeal to Ignorance

Henry - So we're back. So today we're going to talk about two fallacies. The first  one is the straw man argument. So what's the straw man argument? 

Dr. Clouser - It's when you attack, a position that your opponent isn't really  proposing. Suppose we're having a budget argument. I make a proposal that the budget be such and such and that we raise it in the following ways. And then  somebody says, Oh, that's a communist way of thinking, and then makes a big  attack on communism, instead of my budget proposal. They've really changed  the subject to something else that they find easy to attack. Maybe I agree with  their attack. I'm not a communist. But then I'm not proposing anything as a  communist proposal. But they they set up the strawman and knock the  strawman down is easy to do. It's got nothing to do with the issue, the genuine  issue before us.  

Henry - So really what it's doing is just like, throwing the attention somewhere  else. But again, not on the issue of budget. A substitute target definitely seems  like that's a common thread of these fallacies. Don't talk about what the subject  is. Well, that's right. So here's another one. We'll do that one today too appeal to ignorance argumentum ad ignorantiam see, they will have Latin name. He is  definitely in the Latin. Oh, here, we only Latin names. So what is appeal to  ignorance?  

Dr. Clouser - It's like claiming that something has not been proven. Therefore it's false. If it's not been proven then you don't know one way or the other. You can't argue from the fact that nobody tested something that it's either true or false.  You just don't know.  

Henry - Right. But you can take the nots away, too. It's not unproven, therefore.  Maybe it's true. That's right. And I've noticed when I've heard this people slip in  the word that maybe, you know, I mean, they they're not it's almost like they're  gonna modify it just a little bit. 

Dr. Clouser – If you already knew that this is a maybe, which means maybe it's  true. And maybe it's not, then then why make an argument at all? Why, why?  Why add this hasn't been proven, therefore, make it sound as though the  conclusion follows. That it's not true, or it's true. Just if you know that it's  possible, and you don't know which it is true or false then you don't know,  period. You can't appeal to not having proof or not having knowledge, to confirm  either one of those,  

Henry - I think in ministry, we always have to be careful of our exegesis. And that is that we really seek to see what the subject is. And when we can't make a 

conclusion that speculate too much. I mean that you can do this as sort of like,  well, the Scripture says or doesn't say this, therefore, or it doesn't say this? You  know, and then therefore, you know, this is permitable when something else in  scripture contradicts it.  

Dr. Clouser - I used to put this to my students this way, is it the case of whatever Scripture doesn't forbid, is permitted. Or is it the case that whatever it doesn't  permit is forbidden. Right? And the proper answer to that is neither one, right?  What it doesn't forbid, you have to make a judgment concerning using the  principles that it does give you. 

Henry - right, that's powerful everybody. Did you hear what Dr. said, That's  powerful. That that you actually we've been given our mind. We have the Holy  Spirit to kind of guide us is what is right or true, but we don't like try to who is a  logical fallacy, to quote a scripture in a backhanded way when it's not really  there.  

Dr, Clouser - That's right. It's certainly a false assumption that unless it explicitly  permits something, it must be forbidden, or that unless it explicitly forbids then  it's okay. Scripture doesn't name every wrongdoing everybody anybody could  ever think of. Scripture doesn't there's no commandment that says, don't roast  incidents for fun, but it's so wrong. Right? What you have to do is see the  principles that are going on behind the rules that we do have and apply the  principles to the case where we don't have a rule.  

Henry - Very good. Okay. Fine. I'm looking forward to the next two of them.