Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
The tu quoque argument follows the template (i.e. pattern): [2] Person A claims that statement X is true. Person B asserts that A's actions or past claims are inconsistent with the truth of claim X. Therefore, X is false. As a specific example, consider the following scenario where Person A and Person B just left a store.
The tu quoque defense (Latin for 'you too') asserts that the authority trying a defendant has committed the same crimes of which they are accused. [ 1 ] [ 2 ] It is related to the legal principle of clean hands , [ 3 ] reprisal , [ 4 ] and " an eye for an eye ". [ 5 ]
Tu quoque ('you too' – appeal to hypocrisy, whataboutism) – stating that a position is false, wrong, or should be disregarded because its proponent fails to act consistently in accordance with it. [112] Two wrongs make a right – assuming that, if one wrong is committed, another wrong will rectify it. [113]
The phrase "et tu, Brute?" which was used by William Shakespeare in his famous play Julius Caesar as part of Caesar's death scene has become synonymous with betrayal in modern times due to the play's popularity and influence; this has led to the popular belief that the words were Caesar's last words, [29] but in the play itself the words are ...
Ad hominem tu quoque (literally 'you also') is a response to an ad hominem argument that itself goes ad hominem. [14] Tu quoque appears as: A makes a claim a. B attacks the character of A by claiming they hold negative property x. A defends themself by attacking B, saying they also hold the same property x. [15]
The tu quoque fallacy is a specific type of "two wrongs make a right". Accusing another of not practicing what they preach, while appropriate in some situations, [a] does not in itself invalidate an action or statement that is perceived as contradictory.
Specious reasoning does not necessarily rely on malicious intent, and one could formulate a specious argument with what they see as sound logic, only to produce an idea that is flawed or factually incorrect. It is a general term that encompasses forms of logical fallacy, such as tu quoque and circular reasoning.
The form of the post hoc fallacy is expressed as follows: . A occurred, then B occurred.; Therefore, A caused B. When B is undesirable, this pattern is often combined with the formal fallacy of denying the antecedent, assuming the logical inverse holds: believing that avoiding A will prevent B.