The story is told that when training dogs to follow a scent, a red herring (cured fish) with its pungent smell is used to distract the dogs; and they need to learn to ignore the odor. Similarly in logic, one trap to fall into is to be distracted by a tangential argument that misses the point of the case being made.
This actually refers to a large category of fallacies, some of which I will probably describe in the future.
Some argue that the church must allow same sex marriages, due to the fact that there are young gay members who have committed suicide. As much as I sorrow for the tragic loss of lives so young, the argument is fallacious. The terrible situation of suicides does not deal directly with the question of same sex marriage within the church, and is a red herring argument.
Similarly, when someone claims that homosexuality is a sin because homosexual relationships cannot produce children, their claim is fallacious. The ability of an act to produce offspring has nothing to do with the definition of sin, and so is a red herring.
If we want to deal with real concerns and bring all sides together to talk about the issues, we need to avoid red herring arguments. Then the issues themselves can be seen more clearly and dialog can be more meaningful.
Thank you for your insight. I heartily agree.
ReplyDelete