The post looks back at the undergraduate habit of interrupting an argument with labels such as straw man or argument from ignorance. It argues that naming a fallacy rarely explains the problem and often ends the conversation before anyone has done the harder interpretive work.
Its main concern is persuasion. A label can identify a pattern, but it does not show which premise failed, what evidence is missing, or how an argument could be repaired.
This became part of the same teaching problem I later described in Stop Calling It Grammar: a diagnostic term is only useful when it helps a writer decide what to do next.
Related: Research Musings (2014)