What Makes Up Circular Arguments & Red Herrings?

In previous posts, I wrote about how false facts and poor fact checking can spoil your writing. Sometimes, the information you are working with is not the problem, though: It’s you. I’m not trying to be rude, but if your argument isn’t logical, well, no amount of good (or bad) research can save your paper. Logic comes easily to some people, whereas others, not so much. So, this month I begin a series of posts on avoiding common logical fallacies.

Logic Is Learned

This topic is near and dear to my heart not only because I am a writer and proofreader, but also because I am a parent of two teenagers. One thing I’ve learned as a parent is that fifteen-year-olds experiment in a lot of ways as they are maturing, not least with arguments often based on logical fallacies.

Case in point, today at breakfast my friend told her son she could see another perspective on a situation he was describing that happened at school. Her son’s response with a devilish grin/mock offense and high drama, “You don’t believe a single thing your own children say?!” Perfect example of a hasty generalization and emotional (pseudo-) appeal!

What Is a Logical Fallacy?

But before we dig into the specific types of logical fallacies, let’s approach the topic in a most logical manner by looking deeply into what they are. Recently, I’ve been thinking about morphology and word roots, and “logical fallacy” is a perfect case. The word “logic” comes from the Greek logike meaning “reasoning.” (Latin has the word logic meaning “logic,” and both the Greek and Latin are thought to come from the ancestral language Proto Indo-European root leg meaning both collect and speak.) The word “fallacy” comes from Latin fallacia meaning “deception.”

So, “logical fallacy” means deception based on reasoning, basically using facts to deceive a listener or reader.

Formal & Informal

There are two main types of fallacy, formal and informal. Formal fallacies are based on problematic structure (e.g., if A = B and B = C then A = C, a structure that doesn’t necessarily add up in reality) and informal fallacies are based on problematic language or false “proof.”

There are quite a few specific types of formal and informal logical fallacy: begging the question, post hoc, hasty generalization, circular argument, slippery slope, appeal to authority/ignorance, ad hominem, red herring, causal fallacy, strawman, and others. In today’s and my next few posts, I’ll explore some of the most common ones in detail.

Circular Argument/Begging the Question

A circular argument, an informal fallacy, goes ’round and ’round and is also known as “begging the question” or the fancy Latin petitio principii (“petitioning the principle”). This type of reasoning offers an argument but then “supports” that argument by simply restating it. For example:

• Mr. Luellen is the best teacher because he’s won Teacher of the Year multiple times.
• Cats are the best domesticated animals and have been pets to people for thousands of years. Thus, it’s clear that cats are the best pets for people today and throughout history.

The first example above states that Mr. Luellen is the best teacher because he’s been Teacher of the Year more than once. But presumably a teacher wins this award because they are the best at what they do. Therefore to state he is the best because he won the award, which you win for being the best, is circular. The second example states that cats are the best pets because they’ve been pets for a long time because they have been the best pets for a long time. In circular arguments such as these nothing beyond the original opinion being shared.

Red Herring

Have you ever wondered what color a regular herring is? Well, it’s not red! It’s more of a silver-gray, somewhat boring fishy color. The expression “red herring” refers to a type of smoked fish that turns red through the process of smoking, and this type of fish with its strong smell was used to distract foxes and make them easier to catch in a hunt.

A red herring argument, also an informal fallacy, is used to distract the audience’s attention away from the point at hand. Information provided in a red herring argument is only tangentially related to the argument at hand. For example:

• House Bill 2434, which will require guns made by hobbyists to have serial numbers on them, is a waste of the government’s time to even consider; potters are not required to number their creations, after all.
• My dog is the cutest pet on the block, and this block has a lot of really interesting houses on it.

In the first case, the argument that guns should not have to have serial numbers on them is supposedly supported by other hobbyists’ not having to similarly number the things they make, but clearly there’s a reason to track guns that isn’t relevant to ceramic pots and mugs. In the second case, the block a dog lives on having really interesting houses on it in no way supports the idea that the speaker’s dog is very cute.

Circular and red herring arguments are missing what a good argument needs: related evidence based on solid research and reasoning. In my upcoming posts, I’ll explore other logical fallacies of both the informal and formal varieties you should keep an eye out for and avoid in your writing to ensure your claim is strong.

In the meantime, checking for logical fallacies is part of the ProofreadingPal service! Check us out with a free sample.

Sarah P.