The Ignoratio elenchi reference article from the English Wikipedia on 24-Jul-2004 (provided by Fixed Reference: snapshots of Wikipedia from wikipedia.org)

Ignoratio elenchi

Ignoratio elenchi (also known as irrelevant conclusion) is the logical fallacy of presenting an argument that may in itself be valid, but which proves or supports a different proposition than the one it is purporting to prove or support. "Ignoratio elenchi" can be roughly translated by ignoring the issue; "elenchi" is from the Greek ελεγχος, meaning an argument of disproof or refutation.

Examples:

• Defense Lawyer: "Tax fraud is not much of a crime, and it is unfair for my client to be subjected to this lengthy and stressful trial over such a minor offense." ''(this is irrelevant, the lawyer's job is to prove innocence.)
• There is a lot of violence in America's inner-cities. You should therefore support an increase to welfare funding. (One can agree with either of these statements without agreeing to the other. There is no proof one is relevant to the other)

Aristotle believed that an ignoratio elenchi is a mistake made by a questioner while attempting to refute a respondent's argument. He called it an ignorance of what makes for a refutation.

External link

Stephen's Guide: Irrelevant Conclusion

This is the "Ignoratio elenchi" reference article from the English Wikipedia. All text is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License. See also our Disclaimer.