🛡️ Steelman vs Strawman

Two words

A strawman (or straw man) is a distorted, weaker version of someone’s argument, which you then defeat as though you’d beaten the real thing. Like a scarecrow, it looks a little like a person and falls over at a push. It’s a fallacy: beating the copy doesn’t touch the original.

A steelman is the opposite: the other side’s argument restated in its strongest, most reasonable form, sometimes stronger than they put it themselves. To steelman is to answer that version.

Where the words come from

The phrase man of straw, for an easily beaten imaginary opponent, is recorded in English by 1620, and in 1724 the logician Isaac Watts wrote of arguers who attack “images of straw of their own making.” The figure is probably a straw dummy or scarecrow, something that looks like a person but is easy to knock down. Logic textbooks began listing the straw man as a named fallacy in the twentieth century.

Steelman is much newer. The earliest use found so far is from 2003, in an online forum post that joked a straw man had grown so strong it would “morph into a steel man.” The word spread in the 2010s as people looked for a name for the habit of arguing against the best version of a view.

The habit itself is old. In 1859, John Stuart Mill wrote in On Liberty that “He who knows only his own side of the case, knows little of that,” and that you must hear opposing arguments from people who actually believe them: “He must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.” In 1787, opening the Federalist papers, Alexander Hamilton reminded readers that “wise and good men” can be found “on the wrong as well as on the right side” of great questions. Philosophers call a related idea the principle of charity: when an argument can be read more than one way, assume the reading that makes the most sense.

Sources: [1], [2], [3], [4]

Why steelmanning wins rounds

• Your answer sticks. If you beat a weak version, the other side simply rebuilds the strong version in their next speech, and your answer misses. Beat the strong version and there’s nothing left to rebuild.
• Judges notice. A judge who hears you restate the other side fairly trusts the rest of what you say. A judge who hears you twist it stops trusting you.
• You prepare for the real fight. When you write the best case against yourself before the tournament, nothing in the round surprises you.
• You find the true clash. Most disagreements come down to one or two real differences in facts or values. Steelmanning strips away the noise so you can argue about those.
• It changes minds. People rarely change their minds when they feel misunderstood. When they hear their view stated fairly, they’re far more willing to listen to your answer. That’s true at the dinner table as well as in a round.

Side by side

Three topics, each strawmanned and steelmanned. Notice that steelmanning works in both directions.

How to steelman

The philosopher Daniel Dennett popularized four rules for criticizing an argument, which he credited to the mathematician and game theorist Anatol Rapoport. In short:

• Ask what they’re trying to protect. Behind most positions is a value: safety, freedom, fairness, opportunity. Name it.
• Use their best evidence, not the weakest thing you found on the internet.
• Keep their conditions. If they say “limit,” don’t say “ban.” If they say “for most students,” don’t say “for every student.”
• Check with them. In cross-ex: “So your argument is ___, is that fair?”

1. Restate the other person’s position so clearly and fairly that they’d say, “Thanks, I wish I’d put it that way.”
2. List the points where you agree, especially ones that aren’t widely shared.
3. Mention anything you’ve learned from them.
4. Only then say what you think is wrong.

Sources: [5]

Using it in a round

In a round, answer what the other side actually said; don’t replace their argument with a different one. But you can answer their argument and its strongest version: “Even if they’re right that ___, and even at its strongest, this argument doesn’t win the round, because ___.” That tells the judge your answer holds no matter how well they rebuild.

When you prepare, write out the steelman of every argument you expect to face. The arguments on each topic page are written as steelmen; the “Strawman or steelman?” boxes show common distortions to avoid.

Cousins of the strawman

• Weak man: answering a real but weak version of a view (for example, its least careful supporter) while ignoring its strongest version.
• Hollow man: answering a view nobody actually holds, often introduced with “some people say.”
• Nutpicking: picking the most extreme member of a group and treating them as typical.

Sources: [1]