Also known as ‘appeal to hypocrisy’. In essence it means to discount someone’s argument because it isn’t consistent with their own behaviour. For example, if you were discussing not being able to find a girlfriend, and a friend suggested losing weight, and your friend was very over-weight, than rather than consider the argument, you might just dismiss it with, ‘Buddy, look in the mirror!’
Another way this can manifest in the FA community is dismissing any advice from ‘normies’, i.e. people in relationships. In a way there is some sense in this. How can they understand Forever Alone or Adult Virgin issues if they are not a part of this community and do not suffer in that way. But stop and think about it. It’s illogical to say that they cannot give any relevant advice whatsoever. You wouldn’t go to the doctor and then not take the medicine because they don’t have the same illness as you!
This fallacy is very similar to Ad hominem attacks. The difference is that Ad Hominem discounts someone’s argument by broadly discrediting them, e.g. a liberal. Whereas tu quoque focuses more behaviour or actions (overeating).
The fallacy can also be related to red herrings, because it diverts attention from the main argument.
I can be wrong and right at the same time
My advice can be good, even if I don’t follow it
We’re all hypocrites
I don’t have to follow my own good advice
The tu quoque fallacy, also known as the “appeal to hypocrisy,” is a specific type of ad hominem argument where an individual attempts to discredit an opponent’s argument by pointing out their inconsistent behavior or actions. The term “tu quoque” is Latin for “you also,” indicating that the focus is on the accuser’s alleged hypocrisy rather than addressing the validity of their argument.
Distinction from Other Fallacies
While similar to ad hominem attacks, which broadly discredit a person, tu quoque specifically targets the inconsistency between a person’s argument and their actions. It is also related to red herrings, as both can divert attention from the main issue at hand.
Example 1: Criticism of Dating Advice
Scenario
A person who feels Forever Alone seeks advice from a friend who is in a relationship. The friend suggests, “You should try being more open and approachable when meeting new people.”
Tu Quoque Response
The person responds, “How can you tell me to be more approachable when you were shy and awkward when we first met?”
Analysis
In this case, the individual is using the tu quoque fallacy by pointing out the friend’s past behavior to dismiss the advice. Instead of considering the validity of the friend’s suggestion, they divert the conversation to the friend’s previous shyness, which is irrelevant to the advice being given. This response prevents them from engaging with the constructive feedback and addressing their own social challenges.
Example 2: Rejection of Self-Improvement
Scenario
A person who is Involuntarily Celibate reads self-help books that emphasize the importance of self-improvement and personal growth. A friend encourages them to take the advice seriously.
Tu Quoque Response
The person replies, “You’re telling me to improve myself, but you still struggle with your own issues, like your job situation.”
Analysis
Here, the individual deflects the conversation by highlighting the friend’s struggles instead of reflecting on their own need for self-improvement. By pointing out the friend’s difficulties, they avoid addressing the validity of the self-help advice, which could potentially help them improve their dating prospects. This reasoning distracts from the core issue of their own personal growth.
Example 3: Dismissing Relationship Goals
Scenario
A person who feels Forever Alone expresses a desire to find a meaningful relationship. A family member suggests they should work on their social skills and get involved in community activities.
Tu Quoque Response
The person responds, “You’re not even in a relationship yourself, so why should I listen to you?”
Analysis
In this example, the individual uses the tu quoque fallacy to dismiss the family member’s advice by pointing out their lack of a relationship. Instead of considering the family member’s suggestions, which might be beneficial, they focus on the family member’s situation, which is irrelevant to the advice being offered. This response prevents them from taking constructive steps toward improving their social interactions.
Conclusion
In each of these examples, the individual uses the tu quoque fallacy to deflect attention from the advice or constructive feedback being offered. By focusing on the perceived hypocrisy or shortcomings of others, they avoid engaging with the real issues affecting their ability to form relationships. Recognizing this pattern can help them shift their focus back to their own growth and the validity of the advice they receive.
Definition and Structure
The tu quoque fallacy typically follows this structure:
Person A makes a claim or accusation (e.g., “You should not smoke; it’s harmful to your health”).
Person B responds by highlighting that Person A has also engaged in the same behavior (e.g., “But you used to smoke!”).
Person B concludes that Person A’s argument is invalid because of their past behavior.
This reasoning is fallacious because the truth of the original claim is independent of the speaker’s actions. Just because someone has acted hypocritically does not negate the validity of their argument.
Examples
Health Argument:
Person A: “You should exercise regularly; it’s important for your health.”
Person B: “You don’t even go to the gym yourself!”
Here, Person B deflects the argument by pointing out Person A’s lack of personal adherence to the advice, rather than addressing the importance of exercise.
Environmental Discussion:
Person A: “We need to reduce our carbon footprint by using public transport.”
Person B: “You drive a car every day, so why should I listen to you?”
Person B attempts to undermine Person A’s argument by highlighting their own behavior, which does not address the merits of the argument about carbon footprints.
Implications
The tu quoque fallacy can lead to unproductive discussions, as it shifts the focus from the argument itself to the personal behavior of the individuals involved. This can create a cycle of accusations and distractions, preventing meaningful dialogue.
Conclusion
In summary, the tu quoque fallacy serves as a reminder that personal behavior does not inherently invalidate an argument. Engaging with the content of the argument rather than resorting to personal attacks can foster more constructive discussions.