Scribd
Upload
244 views3 pages

Tu Quoque

Tu quoque is a fallacy that occurs when one attempts to discredit an argument by pointing out hypocrisy or inconsistency in the opponent's past statements or actions, rather than addressing the substance of the argument. It works by accusing the opponent of hypocrisy or bad faith, but does not actually address the logic or truthfulness of the argument itself. Some key aspects are: 1) It attempts to dismiss an argument based on personal flaws rather than logic. 2) It shifts focus to the opponent rather than the issue being debated. 3) While it may appear to refute the argument, it actually does not prove or disprove the logic or claims being made.

Uploaded by

Patricia Yvone Marinas
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
244 views3 pages

Tu Quoque

Tu quoque is a fallacy that occurs when one attempts to discredit an argument by pointing out hypocrisy or inconsistency in the opponent's past statements or actions, rather than addressing the substance of the argument. It works by accusing the opponent of hypocrisy or bad faith, but does not actually address the logic or truthfulness of the argument itself. Some key aspects are: 1) It attempts to dismiss an argument based on personal flaws rather than logic. 2) It shifts focus to the opponent rather than the issue being debated. 3) While it may appear to refute the argument, it actually does not prove or disprove the logic or claims being made.

Uploaded by

Patricia Yvone Marinas
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 3

TU QUOQUE

The fallacy of tu quoque Latin for "you too" or "you're another”, it continue the same way as the other two
versions of the ad hominem argument, only that the second argument tries to make the first seem hypocritical
or bad faith. The second argument typically does this by referencing characteristics of the first argument 's
existence or actions that disagree with the conclusion of the latter.

The tu quoque (―you too‖) fallacy begins the same way as the other two varieties of the ad hominem
argument, except that the second arguer attempts to make the first appear to be hypocritical or arguing in bad
faith. The second arguer usually accomplishes this by citing features in the life or behavior of the first arguer
that conflict with the latter’s conclusion.

Tu quoque is a fallacy in which someone argues that the statement of their rival must be false because it is
inconsistent with their previous words and deeds. (powerpoint) In other words, one point out that the
opponent acted on his own in the same way and fallaciously uses the alleged hypocrisy as proof to refute his
claim. (powerpoint)

1. In other words, one points out that the opponent has acted in the same manner themselves, and
fallaciously uses the hypocrisy as evidence to refute their argument.
2. When someone asserts that their opponent’s argument must be invalid because it is inconsistent with
their past words and actions.
3. This reasoning is fallacious because it dismisses an argument on grounds of personal flaws; it doesn’t
disprove the logic of an argument, even though it may show the arguer’s hypocrisy. Moreover, tu
quoque arguments don’t typically address the substance of the opposing claim, although it may appear
as if it’s a relevant counter-argument.
HERE ARE THE ADDITIONAL EXAMPLES, SO YOU CAN BETTER UNDERSTAND THE TU QUOQUE FALLACY

EXAMPLE 1: PARENT AND CHILD

Parent: “You have to clean your room, it’s too messy.”

Child: “But your room is messy too, so why should I listen to you?”

The child’s thinking when it comes to following his mother is that he would only not do the things that his
mother also do not, this shows fallacy of you too because the child believes that the statement of her mother
contradicts her action

EXAMPLE 2: ABOUT POLITICIANS

Politician 1: “My opponent has almost always failed to deliver his election promises, and everyone should
remember that.”

Politician 2: “You didn’t deliver your promise to increase the tax rate for rich people, which was at the center
of your election campaign.”

Responding to criticism with criticism, like in this example, it does not directly address the issue at hand, even
though it may seem to do so. It shifts the focus to the opponent’s character or actions, which are generally
irrelevant to the logic of their argument.

EXAMPLE 3: MOTHER AND DAUGHTER

Mother: You should stop smoking. It's harmful to your health.

Daughter: Why should I listen to you? You started smoking when you were 16!

For this example, the daughter commits the tu quoque fallacy. She rejects the argument of her mother's
statement because she feels her mother is speaking in a contradictory manner. Although the mother can
indeed be contradictory, her claim is not invalidated by this.

You might also like