red herring fallacy examples in commercials

Parris's usage of the Bible, instead of the women, persuades readers by making it look like Proctor is at fault. However, the remark from the Gospel pins the blame of the women upon Proctor, as his views do not correlate with the word of God. In the scenario, Proctor is fighting that the women have always had a bad reputation, following Judge Danforth's convicting them of witchcraft. The irrelevance used through mentioning the Bible allows Proctor to forget about the women, and focus on how he contradicted himself against the holy Word. Through Reverend Parris's words, he effectively uses a red herring through the Bible to divert the attention of the audience and Proctor away from the women accused of witchcraft. If one followed up with the same question and mentioned on how he did not elaborate more on his past statements, this could have resulted in a ruined political campaign and possibly a few FBI investigations. This is a terrible place to use a red herring, as many who did not divert from the sexual remarks still had no answer for what he said in 2005. This tactic overall persuades and manipulates the audience to focus on the terrorists instead of his past wrongdoings. The thought of defeating ISIS results in people forgetting about the 2005 sexual remarks. While all could agree that the United States should kick ISIS's butt, Trump utilized the red herring fallacy by using different topics that do not have any correlation whatsoever. This terrorist organization's history of large-scale attacks, invasions of small territories, and their persecution of Christians allowed many Americans to grow deep hatred for the affiliation. During this presidential campaign, the Islamic State had a cruel past that has countlessly caught the emotions of the American people. The statement that Trump used involves using the sensitivity and random topic of ISIS to capture the country's attention. While this is an actual example of what a real red herring could do to dogs, people can be diverted from an argument by logical 'red herring fallacies'. In today's society, the world of animal hunting has used the red herrings as a term for an odor that could divert hunting dogs from detecting the smell of wild creatures. When hearing the name, one might think 'why would one call it such a uncanny name?' The idea actually originates from the 1600s, where British fugitives would use pungent and smelly fish to divert bloodhounds from their path. In particular, the red herring fallacy has been prominent in various arguments across the globe. When arguing, it is common to use logical fallacies, which is defined as an 'error in reasoning that renders an argument invalid'.

For instance, this could include debating about a favorite sports team, a political topic, or even whether or not you should be allowed to go to that lit party later tonight. In everyday life, arguments are often sparked up from differing opinions on certain subjects.

Red herring fallacy examples in commercials