I just read an article that made me think of this form of fallacy. The author labeled a form of theology with a tag that is only used by it’s opponents. The label is, “Replacement Theology.”
Posting this one today because it is short and easy. This fallacy is also know as the “argument from silence” or it is sometimes said a person is “arguing from negative evidence.” Basically it goes like this: I’m right because you haven’t proven me wrong. Or it’s the other way around. In other words the proposition is true because there is no knowledge (ignorance) of any refutation. With the argument from silence the lack of refutation usually comes from within a piece of literature. For instance: “Jesus didn’t eat meat because the bible doesn’t say he did.” I really enjoy […….]
The Red Herring is probably the most common error made in discussions, arguments, and anywhere one argues for a view. There are several types of Red Herrings and I’ll try to cover some of them here. Lets begin by asking, what is a Red Herring?