Critical Thinking Part 3: The Man Who Was Made of Straw

40 thoughts on “Critical Thinking Part 3: The Man Who Was Made of Straw”

  1. Premise: This video will trigger all the anti-vax crazies.
    Logical conclusion after scrolling down: True.

  2. Dinesh D'Souza is the 'King of Straw-men'. Anyone who wants a crash course in Straw-Man fallacies should just watch any of his debates.

  3. This series would be useful if it wasn't so obviously geared towards attempting to convince people of politically correct narratives such as Global Warming, Evolution, Vaccinations and such.  It's presented as a way to think logically and in an unbiased fashion but subtely, and deceptively, it places these subjects in the midst of logical discussion, presenting them as fact, without actually discussing the logic and science behind them.  Disappointing

  4. Straw man is perhaps the most abused fallacy.

    People will constantly make false accusations of a straw man fallacy, and I'm pretty sure they are not aware that they do so. They say "You mischaracterized my statement! What I really meant was X instead of Y. Straw man! Straw man!"

    The problem is that often X is not significantly different from Y for the purposes of the current discussion. That is, the arguments against Y still apply to X, so even if the statement was misrepresented, it was not misrepresented in a way that affects the conclusions, so the argument is not actually a straw man fallacy.

    I think it would have been helpful to warn people about this. Surely you have run into this same phenomenon in discussions on the Internet.

  5. Never ending bad examples on these  so called fallacious busters. Every education now , thats worth its weight, expects the student to be an investigator, instead of a brain dead consumer . If you told somebody what you say above and they looked in to it them self , they would uncover massive corruption, true human evolution, mass extinction events, machine ages, the monetary system, what religion actually means, true human diet etc etc. The video above is just the same old transhumuanist  slavery agenda crap. Read the next sentence twice and on the second time, replace the word pig with human   — Factory farmed pigs need pesticides such as antibiotics to keep them alive in unnatural conditions. Businessmen make more money, it is a highly efficient way of producing product for the market.

  6. The examples here are terrible.  In the pedagogy of logic, one NEVER uses controversial, or emotionally laden examples, as it is fatal to the essence of the lesson.  Magnets, black swans, apples & oranges, and equations – yes.  Controversies ginned up by the mass media – never.

  7. This is funny because this video is the pinnacle of a straw man. Not only is the entire series an oversimplification of critical thinking but it contains either the opinions of someone failing to comprehend critical thinking or a shill straw man. With the argument being used in the sttaw man lesson being clearly pro vaccine regardless of the overwhelming evidence that many vaccines do irreparable harm to immune systems healthy mental and emotional development as well as making huge profits. see

  8. A question might be asked; Can the pharmaceutical companies by trusted to provide safe products?  Among others. Or, how about how many times has Big Pharma been brought to court for litigation concerning the safety of their products? Perhaps after examing the track record of legal procedures in which the plaintiff side was awarded or charges were criminal in nature would cause one to reconsider the "cost/benefit ratio" of using Big Pharma products.  

  9. the misunderstanding of starting premises is why questions of logic on tests that are assumed to be on common knowledge not taught in the class are BIASED. This misunderstanding is clearly described in this video. WHERE CAN I GET THIs COMMON KNOWLEDGE THAT I MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE if not presented or informed that such knowledge is even needed??

  10. I personally think all three of the videos were alike and I am not going to pretend to even know really what all this argument is about. but we have specified some common tactics to mislead everyone, As a person we should be at an opponents argument not pretending to have a issue are issues.

  11. What assumptions about vaccines are being infused in this video?

    1)That the Measles vaccine contains the Measles virus? Nope, no assumption there.
    2)That Pharms make profits? Nope, no assumption there.
    3)That the argument suggesting vaccines actually cause the virus they are intended to cure based simply on point #1 is a bad argument? Nope, no assumption there either.

    So, what are we all missing here; what assumptions and thus child corrupting indoctrinations are taking place in this video?

  12. AH yes … infusing kids with assumptions about vaccines . Mmmhmm looks like standard indoctrination for kids. They pretend to put forward something useful but the key is actually the information presented in the examples. It's the stuff that kids will really remember deep down and forget the logic bit anyway. On top of that it's not even a straw man argument – which creates a schism in the child's mind when they meet people who actually know what a strawman is …

  13. @techNyouvids this is a very interesting video …im noticing a lot of my recent arguements relate to what your are saying here …

  14. Do you mean a strawman argument must be directed at a specific opponent? The examples used here illustrate common false or misleading arguments on a specific issue (in this case the vaccination debate).

    We've specified some common tactics to mislead (over simplify, go off-topic, twisted, etc) but you say this should be at an opponent's argument, not a opposing argument on an issue?

  15. I love the idea of educating children on logic but I don't like the examples that they use in this series.

  16. @rg0057 You're right about that. I wish that they would fix it in the video…I was going to use these in class, but am hesitant to do so if I am going to have to correct the video.

  17. I love the part where he goes "Reducing it to […] black and white.", and the camera panzoomed out as if to say "There are more colors.", but instead it revealed lots of pieces of black and white.

  18. I like the idea and style of this series, but the argument in this video is not a straw man. Claiming that companies make large profits from vaccines is just a non sequitur because it is irrelevant to the safety/efficacy of vaccines.

    A straw man argument would be, "Vaccine proponents claim that vaccines are completely safe/effective, but here is a case of an adverse reaction." Vaccine only claim that vaccines' benefits outweigh the costs/risks, not that they are 100% safe/effective.

  19. The vaccine profit argument is not a straw man, but the argument ABOUT it IS.

    It's presented incompletely. More detail is:
    Vaccines are made by corporations.
    Corporations are required by law to maximize shareholder profits, unless otherwise directed by other laws.
    So corporations have an interest in selling vaccines that are "just safe enough".
    Individuals don't know who to trust, and cannot test vaccines themselves. Therefore vaccines are too risky.

    I disagree, but it's not a bad argument.

  20. Wait… did this video use a straw man or broken logic to indirectly suggest that vaccines are safe and that people who refuse them are nuts? I'm so confused. 🙂

  21. @imtheuploadergtm Couldn't get the video? Try it at 240p (box in the right hand corner of the screen, currently 360p). We could email it to you but it's pretty huge (100MB plus).

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *