Logical Fallacy of Avoiding the Issue / Avoiding the Question / Missing the Point / Straying Off the Subject / Digressing / Distraction

The logical fallacy of avoiding the issue occurs when someone deliberately tries to avoid a subject rather than giving sound reasoning for their conclusions regarding the subject. There may be many reasons why someone may want to avoid a subject. On frequent reason for this avoidance occurs when someone wants to hide the fact that their belief system breaks down in this area.

Examples of the Logical Fallacy of Avoiding the Issue / Avoiding the Question / Missing the Point / Straying Off the Subject / Digressing / Distraction

Rocky: "If you really do believe that there is evidence for molecules-to-man evolution, how did the first self-replicating life come to be?"

Sandy: "That is abiogenesis, and we aren’t talking about that."

Rocky: "I'm talking about the scientific Law of Biogenesis in relation to your earlier claim that "there is no proof of God since everything that we see around us can be explained in naturalistic terms. So how do you say that the first self-replicating life came to be?"

Sandy: "I could answer that, but that is not what we are discussing. You are changing the subject."

Sandy is avoiding answering the question. In this case, it’s probably because the stories that are used to support abiogenesis are not even as convincing as the stories that are used as evidence for evolution.

Sandra: "You are a Christian because you were born into a Christian family. Had you been born in Iraq, you would have been Muslim."

Roxanne: "Well, that didn’t happen. I was born in a Christian family."

Sandra: "My point is that it’s not fair that anyone should be judged just because of where they were born."

Roxanne: "I don’t worry about that."

Roxanne is avoiding the question and the various implications and probably hurting Sandra in the process. Roxanne should have noted that she probably would have been a Muslim, but there is no conclusion to be drawn from that since it is a hypothetical. Instead of refusing to answer Sandra’s concern, Roxanne should have told her the truth: “If you are concerned about the fairness of God, here is what He reveals to me. God is good and knows every circumstance. Don’t you think the One Who is the Source of all love, fairness, righteousness, justice, mercy and wisdom would be wise and fair enough to do what it right? God has revealed to me that He is a righteous judge and that I have to leave the work of judgment to Him. Hypotheticals are not only unproductive in trying to figure this out, but God hasn’t even given us the task of judging everyone.”