The Red Herring

“A red herring is a smelly fish that would distract even a bloodhound. It is also a digression that leads the reasoner off the track of considering only relevant information” (http://www.iep.utm.edu/fallacy/#Red%20Herring).

Have you ever thought that rationality and logic are things of the past? Just watching and listening to politicians will definitely give indication of this. It seems to me that today more people have given up on thinking critically through arguments. Instead they would rather just “believe” what they “feel” is right or take the word of a professor that they know little about besides in the classroom. Don’t get me wrong, there are plenty of great professors out there who would make great mentors as well, but you should still think through their reasoning behind what they are teaching.

Some time ago a college student approached me and we ended up getting into a conversation about creation/evolution. I am not going to debate either right now in light of right and wrong, because there is not enough space to give my argument. It would also be me moving into a red herring, as I would be redirecting the topic to something else, however it was the central topic of our discussion. Plus, you will get an idea of my view just from the conversation.

It ended up that he could not understand why I would believe in creation, and that evolution was obviously the answer and proven. I asked how he knew this and what evidence he had. He just stared at me, and instead asked another question, because he had no idea how to respond. Instead he tried to defend his side by just throwing out a name used by many who do not actually study because everyone uses it and almost all basic science classes use his name. He asked me about Charles Darwin. Now, he did not give any evidence that Darwin gave, just asked me about him. I said I did not agree with his premises and that many scholars, even in evolutionary thought, no longer hold to much of his arguments. I then asked him if he has ever read Charles Darwin at any time in his life. Again, he stared at me and said he has read some quotes. I am betting all my evolution and creation friends are now rolling their eyes.

I moved forward and asked if he knew of the theory regarding Darwin’s Black Box, because anyone that has done some study has heard of this in one form or another. He said no, so I explained to him that Darwin himself theorized that if the eye were more than just a gelatinous ball, his very own theory of evolution would crumble. I asked him if the eye was more then just a gelatin ball. Instead of answering rationally, he says “yes.” Are you serious? I actually asked him that. The eye is made up of cones, rods, and retina and many other parts and is not just a gelatin ball in our heads.

Here is the red herring. Instead of saying he did not know as much as he thought about evolution and would have to go and think about my questions and come back with an answer, and I did ask him about fossil records and transitions and he could not answer or give any credible evidence, he tried to redirect the conversation. His answer was that he thought religion was just an invention so people could figure out how the world began because they did not know prior. Did you catch it? I never brought up religion, but he knew I was a Christian so he used it. He tried to move to religion in general because he could not defend a position that he held so tightly. It was a self-protective mechanism that many use when they know they are caught in a debate.

The second statement was an even more overt red herring. He told me that as an educated man that he can’t understand how I would believe this, even though he could not defend the position for me. Again, instead of answering the topic he attacked my education background. I did not bite, though I wanted to respond to him. I would have said, “Actually it should tell you something that I have a Ph.D. and believe in creation, and you do not even have a Bachelors and you do not believe in it.” Now that would be me giving a red herring back, as it has nothing to do with my or his education, because it is either true or it is not. Has nothing to do with me or him. I never gave religious answers to the creation account, but scientific arguments against the evolution account. I used more of the Intelligent Design arguments (please check before you comment, because there are many non-Christians in this movement as well). I could have given the religious arguments, but wanted to stick to his theories that he did not understand.

I can’t tell you how many times I have seen Christians use this as well when debating others. I have done it myself when I got flustered, or just did not realize until I was taught about it. We are not teaching high school or college students how to critically think and how to debate with someone, and I won’t even get started on the lack of respect being shown to elders either in this regard. We need to teach that just spouting our professors’ beliefs is not enough, and we should work through these arguments ourselves. These are important matters. Either evolution is true or creation is. Either there is a God or there is not. Either all ways lead to God or they don’t. Either Jesus is Savior and Lord or He is not. These questions cannot be answered by simple little cliché statements that you have not studied or learned how to answer and then counter-answer arguments regarding the issue, regardless of where you stand on the spectrum.

Lastly, I do want to say that I have debated many on the other side who do debate very well and have their arguments very concise, both within the Christian circle and without. It seems though it is becoming a far less occurrence then a norm though. Time to get rid of some of the junk liberal classes that everyone has to take and replace them with logic, critical thinking and philosophy, at least at the basic level in order to teach our younger generation how to think critically and for themselves.

Proverbs 23:23, “Buy the truth, and do not sell it, Also wisdom and instruction and understanding.”