The classic example of the appeal to hypocrisy is:
A: I have evidence that smoking is bad for your health.
B: But I have evidence that you smoke yourself.
In this case, B’s argument is fallacious. That A smokes has no bearing on his evidence, which should be considered on its own merits.
Now consider:
A: You should not smoke. I do not smoke. If I smoked, I would have no basis to protest others' smoking.
B: But I have evidence that you smoke.
In this case, B’s argument is completely legitimate, assuming he does have evidence. When A said "If I smoked, I would have no basis to protest others' smoking," he made the question of whether he smokes a valid topic.
Thoughts?
A: I have evidence that smoking is bad for your health.
B: But I have evidence that you smoke yourself.
In this case, B’s argument is fallacious. That A smokes has no bearing on his evidence, which should be considered on its own merits.
Now consider:
A: You should not smoke. I do not smoke. If I smoked, I would have no basis to protest others' smoking.
B: But I have evidence that you smoke.
In this case, B’s argument is completely legitimate, assuming he does have evidence. When A said "If I smoked, I would have no basis to protest others' smoking," he made the question of whether he smokes a valid topic.
Thoughts?
