argumentum ad hominem tu quoque

BiblioMap 
Synonyme
argumentum ad hominem tu quoque, Du-auch-Argument
Definitionen
Von Stephen Downes im Text Stephen's Guide to the Logical Fallacies (1996)
This fallacy is committed when it is concluded that a person's claim is false because 1) it is inconsistent with something else a person has said or 2) what a person says is inconsistent with her actions.
Von Michael C. Labossiere im Text Fallacy Tutorial Pro 3.0 (1995) This type of "argument" has the following form:
Von Michael C. Labossiere im Text Fallacy Tutorial Pro 3.0 (1995) - Person A makes claim X.
- Person B asserts that A's actions or past claims are inconsistent with the truth of claim X.
- Therefore X is false.


Bemerkungen


The fact that a person makes inconsistent claims does not make any particular claim he makes false (although of any pair of inconsistent claims only one can be true - but both can be false). Also, the fact that a person's claims are not consistent with his actions might indicate that the person is a hypocrite but this does not prove his claims are false.
Von Michael C. Labossiere im Text Fallacy Tutorial Pro 3.0 (1995) 
Verwandte Objeke
![]() Verwandte Begriffe (co-word occurance) | argumentum ad hominemargument directed at the person(0.28), argumentum ad hominem circumstantial(0.23), false dilemmafalse dilemma(0.22), argumentum ad hominem abusive(0.21), straw manstraw man(0.19), Poisoning The WellPoisoning The Well(0.18), argumentum ad ignorantiam(0.15), argumentum ad populum(0.13), argumentum ad misericordiam(0.13), slippery slopeslippery slope(0.12), argumentum ad antiquitatem(0.11), argumentum ad baculum(0.11), Argumentationsmuster(0.1), argumentum ad verecundiamAppeal to Authority(0.08), genetische Argumentationsmuster(0.07) |
Statistisches Begriffsnetz 
Zitationsgraph
Zitationsgraph (Beta-Test mit vis.js)
9 Erwähnungen 
- Fallacy Tutorial Pro 3.0 (Michael C. Labossiere) (1995)
- Stephen's Guide to the Logical Fallacies (Stephen Downes) (1996)
- Ad Hominem Arguments (Douglas Walton) (1998)
- Wie man mit Fundamentalisten diskutiert, ohne den Verstand zu verlieren - oder Anleitung zum subversiven Denken (Hubert Schleichert) (1999)
- Richtig argumentieren - oder wie man in Diskussionen recht behält (Jürgen August Alt) (2000)
- 9. Fehler beim Argumentieren - Fehlschlüsse, faule Tricks und Immunisierungsstrategien
- Argumentieren - Trainingsbuch für Beruf und Alltag (Andreas Edmüller, Thomas Wilhelm) (2005)
- 5. NoPower-Argumente: Unfaire Verführer - Wie Sie sich vor Fehlschlüssen und Taktiken hüten
- Zum erfolgreichen Plagiat in zehn einfachen Schritten - Eine Anleitung (Roland Schimmel) (2011)
- Die 10 Gebote des gesunden Menschenverstands (Nikil Mukerji) (2016)
- Bad Arguments - 100 of the Most Important Fallacies in Western Philosophy (Robert Arp, Steven Barbone, Michael Bruce) (2019)
Externe Links
![]() | ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |