Question

...
LF2023

Bigotry

Is there a fallacy in where one claims that the only reason one is arguing for x is so that they can simply justify their bigotry, and therefore the claims one makes are invalid? 

asked on Sunday, Dec 15, 2024 03:41:51 PM by LF2023

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."

Uncomfortable Ideas: Facts don't care about feelings. Science isn't concerned about sensibilities. And reality couldn't care less about rage.

This is a book about uncomfortable ideas—the reasons we avoid them, the reasons we shouldn’t, and discussion of dozens of examples that might infuriate you, offend you, or at least make you uncomfortable.

Many of our ideas about the world are based more on feelings than facts, sensibilities than science, and rage than reality. We gravitate toward ideas that make us feel comfortable in areas such as religion, politics, philosophy, social justice, love and sex, humanity, and morality. We avoid ideas that make us feel uncomfortable. This avoidance is a largely unconscious process that affects our judgment and gets in the way of our ability to reach rational and reasonable conclusions. By understanding how our mind works in this area, we can start embracing uncomfortable ideas and be better informed, be more understanding of others, and make better decisions in all areas of life.

Get 20% off this book and all Bo's books*. Use the promotion code: websiteusers

* This is for the author's bookstore only. Applies to autographed hardcover, audiobook, and ebook.

Get the Book

Answers

...
Kostas Oikonomou
2

I think this is an example of bulverism 

answered on Sunday, Dec 15, 2024 05:37:29 PM by Kostas Oikonomou

Kostas Oikonomou Suggested These Categories

Comments

...
AI Fallacy Master
0
Yes, the scenario you described involves a specific logical fallacy known as the "Ad Hominem" fallacy. An ad hominem attack is when someone criticizes or attacks the person making an argument rather than addressing the substance of the argument itself. In this case, dismissing a person's argument by attributing it solely to their supposed bigotry is an example of attacking the speaker rather than engaging with their claims or evidence.

This type of reasoning also risks falling into the trap of "Motive Fallacy," where the motivation behind someone's argument is used to invalidate the argument itself. While understanding someone's motivations can provide context, it does not inherently invalidate the argument they are making. Each claim should be evaluated on its own merits, using evidence and sound reasoning.

It's essential to separate the argument from the person making it to avoid these logical missteps. Sound reasoning involves critically assessing the evidence and logic presented, regardless of any perceived biases or motivations of the individual presenting them.
answered on Sunday, Dec 15, 2024 03:42:10 PM by AI Fallacy Master

AI Fallacy Master Suggested These Categories

Comments