|
|
WhataboutismI have been having discussions about Whataboutism mainly as it relares to Trump/Obama/HRC Some of my research refers to it as a version of Tu quoque or the Appeal to hypocrisy fallacy. It don't see these fallacies in a search. An example is
A: Trump is a narcissist B: Obama and all other presidents were narcissists A: so you agree he is a narcissist A: I don't like Trump using Executive Orders it's not constitutional B: look at all the EO' Obama used they were unconstitutional A: Then you are Ok with Trump issuing EO even though they are unconstitutional. Is Whataboutism a logical fallacy? |
| asked on Sunday, Feb 11, 2018 02:52:23 PM by John | |
Top Categories Suggested by Community |
|
Comments |
|
|
| |
Want to get notified of all questions as they are asked? Update your mail preferences and turn on "Instant Notification."
Claims are constantly being made, many of which are confusing, ambiguous, too general to be of value, exaggerated, unfalsifiable, and suggest a dichotomy when no such dichotomy exists. Good critical thinking requires a thorough understanding of the claim before attempting to determine its veracity. Good communication requires the ability to make clear, precise, explicit claims, or “strong” claims. The rules of reason in this book provide the framework for obtaining this understanding and ability.
This book / online course is about the the eleven rules of reason for making and evaluating claims. Each covered in detail in the book.
|
|
This is from my website, Whataboutery. People are called out on their "whataboutery" when they point out hypocrisy. For example, if a father tells his child not to smoke, and the child says "what about you? You smoke several packs a day!" The argument is that one shouldn't smoke, not that the one making the argument is exempt from that rule. So a "what about you" response does not address the argument, thus, is fallacious. However, it is a valid question that does warrant a response. Perhaps the father would respond "I am an idiot with no self-control." But if the father simply responded "that's 'whataboutery,'" it would be akin to the fallacy fallacy, where the implication is that because the response is a fallacy, then it must be incorrect, unreasonable, or undeserving of a response. This is a deflection and an argumentative cop out. Feel free to point out the whataboutery, but respond to the accusation and don't stop dialog because you have your opponent on a technicality. |
| answered on Monday, Feb 12, 2018 09:43:21 AM by Bo Bennett, PhD | |
Bo Bennett, PhD Suggested These Categories |
|
Comments |
|
|
| |
