My boyfriend pointed out these two fallacies, and now I feel like I see them everywhere!
Argument from future majority: "In a few decades, everyone will look back and see how wrong you were."
Hidden assumptions: Will people in the future in fact see how wrong you were? Is the majority opinion relevant? Are future people's opinions necessarily better than present people's opinions?
Combines: appeal to future evidence and argument from majority
Argument from hypothetical hypocrisy: "If she were a Republican, the right-wing would be dismissing this scandal as a distraction."
Hidden assumptions: Would the right-wing in fact do that? Does that necessarily mean that the right-wing's current actions are wrong, or could it just mean that their hypothetical actions are wrong? Do hypothetical wrongs of the right-wing justify similar wrongs of the left-wing?
Combines: begging the question and tu quoque
The nature of these arguments is that even if all parties were to agree on the hypothetical, the conclusions are still fallacious.
Monday, May 28, 2012
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
