When Logic Goes in Circles — Strawmen, Red Herrings, and Rational Humility

✍️ Inspired by Logically Fallacious by Bo Bennett, PhD

(Direct quotations reproduced from the Academic Edition, 2020)

🔥 The Final Battle Between Logic and Ego

If you’ve made it this far, congratulations — you now think more clearly than most people on the internet.
But before we end, we need to tackle three final fallacies that are the favorite tools of bad debaters, politicians, and — yes — internet trolls.

Bo Bennett introduces them not just as reasoning errors, but as conversation derailers. They make rational discussion impossible by replacing real logic with smoke, mirrors, and circles.

🎯 1. The Strawman Fallacy — “Fighting the Argument No One Made”

Bo Bennett’s definition:

“When an arguer misrepresents an opponent’s argument, and then attacks that misrepresentation instead of the actual argument.”

Think of it like this: your opponent builds a house of logic — and instead of entering, you set fire to a cardboard version of it next door.

📺 Example

“Person A: We should have stricter regulations on pollution.
Person B: Oh, so you want to shut down all industry and make everyone unemployed?”

That’s not what Person A said — but it’s easier to attack.

Bo’s advice is timeless:

“Apply the principle of charity — do your best to assume the most charitable interpretation of the argument.”

In other words, argue against the strongest version of your opponent’s idea, not the easiest one.

🧭 2. The Red Herring — “The Art of Distraction”

Named after the old hunting trick of dragging a smelly fish to throw dogs off the scent, this fallacy does the same to reasoning — it diverts attention from the real issue.

Bo doesn’t define this one in isolation but refers to it throughout as a classic form of evasion: when we “move the conversation forward” by moving it sideways.

📚 Example

“Why are we discussing safety violations when the economy is the real issue here?”

Or the timeless favorite:

“You can’t talk about pollution until you fix poverty!”

Both distract from the original point, giving the illusion of depth while avoiding accountability.

Bo calls this a symptom of “limited scope reasoning” — focusing anywhere except where logic requires.

💡 Tip from Bo:

“Act in good faith… and resist the temptation to assume the worst from your interlocutor. This will move the conversation forward rather than create a branched argument about a potential fallacy that serves as an irrelevant distraction.”

Translation: Don’t follow the red herring down the rabbit hole. Stay on track.

🔄 3. Circular Reasoning — “Because I Said So”

If you’ve ever been told something is true because it’s true, you’ve experienced circular logic.

Bo defines it simply:

“Using your conclusion as one of your premises.”

It’s reasoning that eats its own tail.

📚 Example (common and funny)

“The Bible is true because it’s the Word of God.
How do you know it’s the Word of God?
Because the Bible says so.”

Round and round we go — but no progress is made.

Circular reasoning feels comforting because it’s self-contained — but that’s exactly why it’s deceptive. There’s no outside verification, just repetition dressed as proof.

Bo explains this kind of reasoning often “bypasses critical thought in favor of belief reinforcement.”

🧠 Bonus: Hasty Generalization — “Jumping to Conclusions”

Before we close, one final trap.

“When one draws a conclusion about all or many instances of a phenomenon from one or few instances of it.”

Example:

“I met two rude taxi drivers in New York — New Yorkers are rude.”

Bennett reminds us: this fallacy “arises from limited sample size and overconfidence in generalization.”

He doesn’t mock it — he teaches empathy: we generalize because our brains crave patterns, even where none exist.

💬 The Real Lesson: Rationality with Humanity

In his later chapters, Bo Bennett moves from logic to life philosophy — a transition your readers will love.

He writes:

“If you are a parent, you know exactly what it is like to argue with someone who is unreasonable and irrational… Unfortunately, many people carry these success-repelling traits with them into adulthood.”

The challenge isn’t just thinking logically — it’s staying calm when others don’t.

“As you might have guessed, those who are acting unreasonably and irrationally are either incapable or unwilling to accept that their arguments are fallacious… You can simply give up, or, if possible, you can show how their arguments and beliefs are inconsistent with other beliefs they hold. This is my preferred strategy.”

That’s not just logic — that’s wisdom.

🪞 Final Reflection from Bo

“Act in good faith. Apply the principle of charity… Focus on exactly what error in reasoning you are being accused of, and defend your reasoning — not a definition or name.”

Logic isn’t a weapon — it’s a mirror. It doesn’t prove superiority; it reveals honesty.
And sometimes, humility is the most rational response.

💡 Quick Recap

Fallacy	Description	Example	Lesson
Strawman	Misrepresenting an argument to attack it	“You want clean air? So you hate jobs?”	Argue against what was said, not what’s easier.
Red Herring	Distracting from the issue	“Forget safety; what about the economy?”	Stay focused; don’t chase distractions.
Circular Reasoning	Using conclusion as a premise	“It’s true because I said so.”	Look for independent evidence.
Hasty Generalization	Drawing broad conclusions from small samples	“One bad driver = bad city.”	Check the data, not the drama.

🚀 Call to Action: Think Logically, Speak Kindly

The next time you disagree — pause and repeat their point before responding.
Stay on track — if you feel the urge to “change the subject,” ask yourself why.
Challenge your reasoning: Am I using logic — or comfort?
Remember: fallacies aren’t just in others’ arguments — they hide in ours too.

Bo’s legacy reminds us that truth isn’t just discovered — it’s disciplined.

🔖 Reference:

Bo Bennett, PhD (2020). Logically Fallacious: The Ultimate Collection of Over 300 Logical Fallacies (Academic Edition). Archieboy Holdings LLC.