Ad
related to: two wrongs fallacy examples
Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
"Two wrongs make a right" has been considered as a fallacy of relevance, in which an allegation of wrongdoing is countered with a similar allegation. Its antithesis , "two wrongs don't make a right", is a proverb used to rebuke or renounce wrongful conduct as a response to another's transgression.
Two wrongs make a right – assuming that, if one wrong is committed, another wrong will rectify it. [113] Vacuous truth – a claim that is technically true but meaningless, in the form no A in B has C, when there is no A in B. For example, claiming that no mobile phones in the room are on when there are no mobile phones in the room.
The example above was worded in a way to make it amenable to the template given above. However, in colloquial language, the tu quoque technique more often makes an appearance in more subtle and less explicit ways, such as in the following example in which Person B is driving a car with Person A as a passenger:
The proverb "two wrongs don't make a right" highlights the illogic of claiming innocence because of someone else's bad behavior.Such excuses are a form of whataboutism and a discrediting tactic.
An example of a language dependent fallacy is given as a debate as to who in humanity are learners: the wise or the ignorant. [18]: 3 A language-independent fallacy is, for example: "Coriscus is different from Socrates." "Socrates is a man." "Therefore, Coriscus is different from a man." [18]: 4
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.
A correlative conjunction is a relationship between two statements where one must be false and the other true. In formal logic this is known as the exclusive or relationship; traditionally, terms between which this relationship exists have been called contradictories.
Apples and oranges are both similar-sized seeded fruits that grow on trees, but that does not make the two interchangeable. A false equivalence or false equivalency is an informal fallacy in which an equivalence is drawn between two subjects based on flawed or false reasoning. This fallacy is categorized as a fallacy of inconsistency. [1]