irrelevant conclusion

Ignoratio elenchi is one of the fallacies identified by Aristotle in his Organon. In a broader sense he asserted that all fallacies are a form of ignoratio elenchi.{{cite book |title=The Organon, or Logical treatises, of Aristotle |author=Aristotle |author-link=Aristotle |translator=Octavius Freire Owen |year=1878 |url=https://www.jdavidstark.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/aristotle-organon-v-1.pdf |publisher=George Bell and Sons |location=Covent Garden |volume=2 |pages=548–553 |access-date=12 December 2020 |archive-date=30 March 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220330012254/https://www.jdavidstark.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/aristotle-organon-v-1.pdf |url-status=dead }}{{cite web |url=http://philosophy.lander.edu/logic/ignoratio.html |title=Ignoratio Elenchi |work=Introduction to Logic |date=24 September 2009}}

{{Blockquote|Ignoratio Elenchi, according to Aristotle, is a fallacy that arises from "ignorance of the nature of refutation". To refute an assertion, Aristotle says we must prove its contradictory; the proof, consequently, of a proposition which stood in any other relation than that to the original, would be an ignoratio elenchi. Since Aristotle, the scope of the fallacy has been extended to include all cases of proving the wrong point ... "I am required to prove a certain conclusion; I prove, not that, but one which is likely to be mistaken for it; in that lies the fallacy ... For instance, instead of proving that 'this person has committed an atrocious fraud', you prove that 'this fraud he is accused of is atrocious{{'"}}; ... The nature of the fallacy, then, consists in substituting for a certain issue another which is more or less closely related to it and arguing the substituted issue. The fallacy does not take into account whether the arguments do or do not really support the substituted issue, it only calls attention to the fact that they do not constitute proof of the original one… It is a particularly prevalent and subtle fallacy and it assumes a great variety of forms. But whenever it occurs and whatever form it takes, it is brought about by an assumption that leads the person guilty of it to substitute for a definite subject of inquiry another which is in close relation with it.{{cite book |first=Arthur Ernest |last=Davies |year=1915 |title=A Text-Book of Logic |publisher=R. G. Adams and company |lccn=15027713 |url=https://archive.org/details/afx7162.0001.001.umich.edu |pages=[https://archive.org/details/afx7162.0001.001.umich.edu/page/569 569]–576}}|Arthur Ernest Davies|"Fallacies" in A Text-Book of Logic}}

Samuel Johnson's unique "refutation" of Bishop Berkeley's immaterialism, his claim that matter did not actually exist but only seemed to exist,{{Harvnb|Bate|1977|p=316}} has been described as ignoratio elenchi:Bagnall, Nicholas. Books: Paperbacks, The Sunday Telegraph 3 March 1996 during a conversation with Boswell, Johnson powerfully kicked a nearby stone and proclaimed of Berkeley's theory, "I refute it thus!"{{Harvnb|Boswell|1986|p=122}} (See also argumentum ad lapidem.)

A related concept is that of the red herring, which is a deliberate attempt to divert a process of enquiry by changing the subject.{{cite book|author=Patrick J. Hurley|title=A Concise Introduction to Logic|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Ikp2dGWT5O4C&pg=PT155|year=2011|publisher=Cengage Learning|isbn=978-0-8400-3417-5|pages=131–133}} Ignoratio elenchi is sometimes confused with straw man argument.

The phrase ignoratio elenchi is {{ety|la||an ignoring of a refutation}}. Here elenchi is the genitive singular of the Latin noun elenchus, which is {{ety|grc|ἔλεγχος (elenchos)|an argument of disproof or refutation}}.{{cite book |title=A Greek-English Lexicon |author=Liddell–Scott–Jones |url=http://archimedes.fas.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/dict?name=lsj&lang=el&word=e%29%2flegxos&filter=CUTF8}} The translation in English of the Latin expression has varied somewhat. Hamblin proposed "misconception of refutation" or "ignorance of refutation" as a literal translation, John Arthur Oesterle preferred "ignoring the issue", and Irving Copi, Christopher Tindale and others used "irrelevant conclusion".{{cite book|title=Fallacies|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=eW0FPQAACAAJ&pg=PA31|publisher=Methuen & Co. Ltd.|page=31|author=Charles Leonard Hamblin|year=1970}}{{cite book|author=Christopher W. Tindale|title=Fallacies and Argument Appraisal|url=https://archive.org/details/fallaciesargumen00tind|url-access=limited|year=2007|publisher=Cambridge University Press|isbn=978-0-521-84208-2|page=[https://archive.org/details/fallaciesargumen00tind/page/n53 34]}}

{{Wiktionary|ignoratio elenchi}}

• Ad hominem
• Begging the question
• Chewbacca defense
• Enthymeme
• Evasion (ethics)
• Genetic fallacy
• List of fallacies
• Non sequitur (logic)
• Sophism
• Tone policing

{{Reflist}}

• {{cite book |last=Bate |first=Walter Jackson |author-link=Walter Jackson Bate |title=Samuel Johnson |year=1977 |publisher=Harcourt Brace Jovanovich |location=New York |isbn=978-0-15-179260-3 |url=https://archive.org/details/samueljohnson000bate}}
• {{cite book |last=Boswell |first=James |title=The Life of Samuel Johnson |year=1986 |editor-last=Hibbert |editor-first=Christopher |publisher=Penguin Classics |location=New York |isbn=978-0-14-043116-2}}

{{Wiktionary|red herring}}

• [http://www.appealtoauthority.info Appeal to Authority Breakdown, Examples, Definitions, & More]
• [https://web.archive.org/web/20141011063807/http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/red-herring.html Nizkor Project: Red Herring]
• [http://www.fallacyfiles.org/redherrf.html Fallacy Files: Red Herring]
• [http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/red-herring.html The Phrase Finder: Red Herring]
• [http://coolhaus.de/art-of-controversy/erist29.htm The Art of Controversy: Diversion] (bilingual with the original German) by Arthur Schopenhauer
• [http://www.figarospeech.com/it-figures/2006/3/19/and-now-congress-pauses-for-a-word-from-its-sponsor.html Red herring in political speech]

{{Fallacies}}

{{Aristotelianism}}

Category:Metaphors