Ignoratio elenchi (irrelevant conclusion) occurs when reasons may be valid but support a different conclusion than the one under discussion. The argument sounds strong, yet misses the target.
Example
“Policy X is unfair.”
“But the country needs economic growth.”
(Growth does not prove the policy is fair.)
Applied example (political)
“Corruption is discussed and the response is economic achievements.” (It misses the issue.)
Applied example (mystical)
“Evidence is requested and the response is stories of faith.” (The argument is irrelevant.)
Why it is fallacious
- It shifts the topic without resolving the core issue.
- It presents a different conclusion as if it were the same.
- It confuses rhetorical force with relevance.
How to spot it
- The argument answers a different question.
- The original claim remains untouched.
- There is a gap between what is proven and what is asserted.
How to respond
- Restate the original question.
- Ask for an explicit link between reasons and conclusion.
- Separate the different debates.