Ignoratio elenchi facts for kids
Ignoratio elenchi is a fancy way of saying "ignoring the point." It's a type of fallacy (a mistake in thinking or arguing) where someone makes an argument that might sound good, but it doesn't actually answer the main question or topic being discussed.
Think of it like this: someone asks you, "Did you finish your homework?" And you reply, "I cleaned my room!" Cleaning your room is a good thing, but it doesn't answer the homework question. That's an ignoratio elenchi.
The phrase "ignoratio elenchi" comes from Ancient Greece. It roughly means "ignorance of refutation." A "refutation" is when you prove something wrong. So, this fallacy means you don't understand what it takes to actually disprove an argument. The famous Greek thinker Aristotle talked about this idea a long time ago.
Contents
What is a Red Herring?
A red herring is very similar to ignoratio elenchi, but it has a key difference. A red herring is when someone deliberately tries to change the subject or distract from the main argument. They know they are shifting the focus.
Imagine you're talking about why you should eat your vegetables, and someone suddenly starts talking about how good ice cream is. They are trying to change the subject on purpose. This is a red herring. The original problem (eating vegetables) gets hidden by the new topic (ice cream).
Examples of Ignoring the Point
Famous People and Arguments
Sometimes, people in public discussions use this fallacy. For example, in a TV show, a host might ask a guest about their beliefs.
- Guest: "If you were born in a different country, you might believe something else."
- Host: "Well, that's just your opinion."
Here, the host's reply ("that's just your opinion") doesn't actually deal with the guest's idea. It doesn't prove the guest wrong or right. It just avoids the real discussion.
Sports and Achievements
Let's look at a sports example:
- "The baseball player Mark McGwire just retired. He's a really nice guy, and he gives lots of money to charities. So, he should definitely be in the Hall of Fame."
Being a nice person and giving to charity are great qualities. But they aren't the main reasons someone gets into the Hall of Fame. That's usually about how well they played the game. So, the argument ignores the real requirements for the Hall of Fame.
Rules and Consequences
Here's another example you might hear:
- "I shouldn't have to pay a fine for driving too fast. There are serious criminals out there, and the police should be catching them instead of bothering me!"
This person is trying to avoid their fine by talking about bigger problems. While it's true that serious criminals exist, that doesn't change whether this driver broke the rules. The question of who the police should chase is separate from whether this driver deserves a fine. If the driver was trying to distract the police on purpose, it would be a red herring.
See also
