Question

...
Darren

What Is This Fallacy?

What is the fallacy where someone attacks someone else, yet the attack constitutes the exact behavior the other party is being criticized for. 
example:   a candidate says—“we should all be high-brow and talk about the issues, not spend our time attacking the other candidate, like my opponent does.“

asked on Monday, Aug 19, 2024 12:13:23 PM by Darren

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."

Eat Meat... Or Don't.

Roughly 95% of Americans don’t appear to have an ethical problem with animals being killed for food, yet all of us would have a serious problem with humans being killed for food. What does an animal lack that a human has that justifies killing the animal for food but not the human?

As you start to list properties that the animal lacks to justify eating them, you begin to realize that some humans also lack those properties, yet we don’t eat those humans. Is this logical proof that killing and eating animals for food is immoral? Don’t put away your steak knife just yet.

In Eat Meat… Or Don’t, we examine the moral arguments for and against eating meat with both philosophical and scientific rigor. This book is not about pushing some ideological agenda; it’s ultimately a book about critical thinking.

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

...
Mr. Wednesday
0

The scenario you're describing could be special pleading , where the politician is creating or citing a rule, and applying it to their opponent, but not themselves. I will say the specific specific example you provided, though, may not be a good application of this. The politician, in this scenario, does point out an issue with their opponent's behavior rather than a policy issue, but it seems to be less of a personal attack and more of an attempt to bring their opponent into the policy debate that they are advocating for.
answered on Monday, Aug 19, 2024 12:32:11 PM by Mr. Wednesday

Mr. Wednesday Suggested These Categories

Comments
...
AI Fallacy Master
-2
The fallacy you're describing is known as "tu quoque" (Latin for "you too"), a type of ad hominem fallacy. It occurs when someone attempts to discredit an opponent's position by asserting the opponent's failure to act consistently with that position. In other words, it is an attempt to invalidate the opponent's argument by claiming they are guilty of the same or similar behavior they are criticizing.

In your example:
- The candidate is criticizing their opponent for spending time attacking rather than focusing on the issues.
- However, by making this statement, the candidate themselves is engaging in an attack, thus committing the exact behavior they are criticizing.

This fallacy distracts from the actual argument or issue at hand by focusing on the opponent's supposed hypocrisy, rather than addressing the merits of the argument itself.
answered on Monday, Aug 19, 2024 12:13:32 PM by AI Fallacy Master

AI Fallacy Master Suggested These Categories

Comments
...
1
Darren writes:

This answer is totally off. This is not tu quoque.  The initial arguer is not saying “you do it too.”   Rather, the initial arguer is in fact doing it too, but doesn’t realize it.  That has nothing to do with tu quoque, rather it’s the failure to recognize that one is criticizing someone else, where the criticism is itself the exact type of behavior being criticized.

As an aside, as amazing as the technology is, I think the AI’s inability to recognize nuances such as this shows that the technology still has a long way to go.  

posted on Monday, Aug 19, 2024 12:28:56 PM