"Appeal to hypocrity" logical fallacy

File: butts.jpg (9KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 480x360px

>>131728616

>bad arguments
>called out on /pol/

>>131728616
it may be a logical fallacy but it's an effective rhetorical device.

>>131728616
Fuck off nigger

>>131728616
>Informal
There's a reason it's an "informal" fallacy and not a proper logical fallacy, because it's fucking true and was made up by liberals as an excuse for their constant hypocrisy

>>131728616
Because its an informal fallacy, and thus not a real one. And because the real world doesn't stop functioning the second a fallacy is made in an argument, no one really cares outside text based conversations.

It's a logical fallacy, but it's logical to use it in the same way it usually makes sense to to say 1 + 1 = 2 without truly proving it.

>you have to follow rules that I don't have to follow

>>131728616

It's only a fallacy if you try to use it to prove claim x is false. It's an effective rhetorical device to call out hypocrisy by the person making that claim, and to call into question whether they truly believe it, or if they only believe it in some circumstances

>>131728616
Debate is a game
Rhetoric and sophistry are the metagame

>>131728616
because /pol/ is an anonymous social medium.

its rather difficult to build a tu quoque argument against someone you have no knowledge of

This logical fallacy thing has gone too far. That's just a solid logical argument.

File: 3D51177F-DBBE-4D16-A7F6-7F82BD67A61E-2162-00000690F8138BEA_tmp.gif (2MB, 202x360px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 202x360px

>>131729907
Getting into the whole "turtles all the way down" thing with arguments seems inevitable.
Seems nowadays that divided sides would argue down to the nanoangstrom of an argument and even then further still try to push the envelope.

>>131728616
because the people you would call it out on thing lohic is bourgeioisie

>>131729853
Ad hominem is also an informal fallacy, yet people somewhat care about those on /pol/.

>>131728616
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_fallacy
Op is a faggot agin, quelle surprise

>>131729597
>logical fallacies are okay
>t. low IQ

>>131729740
>There's a reason it's an "informal" fallacy and not a proper logical fallacy
It's called an informal fallacy only because it addresses the validity of the argument rather than its structure, you idiot. It is a "proper fallacy." Stupid idiot retard leaf.

>>131733308
They're not okay, but some are almost impossible to pick apart in a debate. You can't give the audience a lecture on why your hypocrisy doesn't effect either your premise or conclusion.

>>131728616
I call it out all the time.

A lot of the times its not an appeal to hypocrity if their argument involves them arguing that they do or dont do something.

It's not a common one to call out because typically people who make an argument about moral behavior but don't follow that behavior themselves ARE ARGUING DISHONESTLY AND SHOULD ACTUALLY REALLY BE DISREGARDED.

Strictly logically, yes it's a fallacy. But as soon as you get even the most tiny bit pragmatic, if someone talks the talk but doesn't walk the walk fuck them.

>>131728616
Because some logical fallacies are bullshit, like the slippery slope.

>>131730384
Nicely said. That'd be good on a poster, maybe an image macro over congress.

>>131729853
>and thus not a real one
See >>131733505 and just fucking kill yourself.
>>131733064
Did you really think you could contest any fallacy simply by citing the fallacy fallacy, you fucking idiot? A fallacy fallacy has only been committed if someone concludes that the conclusion of an argument is wrong just because it's invalid. It has nothing to do with "citing a fallacy being a fallacy," you stupid fucking mouth-breather.

>>131733903
>>131729853
Ugh, I meant see >>131733474

>>131728616
its shit & anyone that uses it is a retard whos personally attacking you & ignoring everything else

>>131730384
>Rhetoric and sophistry are the metagame
Oh shut up you fucking idiot. If you need to use rhetoric whatsoever, it's because you don't have an argument.

>>131734034
Like this triggered faggot?>>131733903

>>131728616

a hypocrite is bad because it shows a contradiction/inconsistency between stated beliefs and behaviours.

a hypocrite is basically a parasite/freerider trying to get others to abide by norms they won't abide by themselves

File: 1495438400687.jpg (12KB, 410x415px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 410x415px

>>131734154
yeah theres one now, neat

>>131728616
Because in politics it's okay just calling them out on one of their bullshit positions, not a fallacy if you are using it for this not to win only one of the arguments.

>>131734119
the person that wins doesnt always have an argument

>>131734384
>a hypocrite is bad because it shows a contradiction/inconsistency between stated beliefs and behaviors.
totally irrelevant
>OMG YOU CANT SAY MURDER IS BAD BECAUSE YOU KILLED SOMEONE
shut your cuck hole my man

>>131734384
But that doesn't invalidate their arguments.

If you say people shouldn't do drugs because it's unhealthy while also high on heroin, it does not mean that drugs are not unhealthy and that people should not avoid them. It's a bad reflection on your character, but nothing more. In an ideal debate, you do not care about the character of your opponent, only the arguments they are putting forth.

>>131728616
it's pol, if you wanted intellectual arguments
go to some professional conference

>>131734650
>HOLY SHIT THE WORLD IS BLACK AND WHITE
Wtf i love Hillary now

>>131728616
>pointing out someones hypocrisy is a fallacy
lel

>>131735884
Pointing out their hypocrisy isn't a fallacy, but trying to use their hypocrisy to invalidate their argument is.