RE: 'tu quoque' am I iwrong?
August 15, 2012 at 9:46 pm
(This post was last modified: August 15, 2012 at 9:48 pm by Jackalope.)
My opinion (worth every penny you paid for it, BTW).
It is my understanding that the fallacy of tu quoque takes two forms: The "you too" form (appeal to hypocrisy), and the "inconsistency" form (your argument is inconsistent with prior claims).
It is not necessarily tu quoque to point out that another's argument is inconsistent with prior claims or that they are a hypocrite. It is tu quoque to do so, and then claim that because of the prior inconsistency or hypocrisy that their current argument is without merit.
Pointing out hypocrisy or inconsistency can just be a way of saying "you know, dude, perhaps you haven't thought this through completely" without being fallacious. Much like calling someone a "stupid jerk" is only an ad hominem in the context of "You're wrong, because you're a stupid jerk" and not "You're wrong because of X, you stupid jerk.". The latter form is merely insulting.
It is my understanding that the fallacy of tu quoque takes two forms: The "you too" form (appeal to hypocrisy), and the "inconsistency" form (your argument is inconsistent with prior claims).
It is not necessarily tu quoque to point out that another's argument is inconsistent with prior claims or that they are a hypocrite. It is tu quoque to do so, and then claim that because of the prior inconsistency or hypocrisy that their current argument is without merit.
Pointing out hypocrisy or inconsistency can just be a way of saying "you know, dude, perhaps you haven't thought this through completely" without being fallacious. Much like calling someone a "stupid jerk" is only an ad hominem in the context of "You're wrong, because you're a stupid jerk" and not "You're wrong because of X, you stupid jerk.". The latter form is merely insulting.
