Tu Quoque

[leftrightleftrightleft]

Can someone explain to me how the tu quoque argument works?

Lets say a mom smokes cigarettes and then tells her son that he shouldn't smoke cigarettes to which the son responds, "how can you tell me not to smoke when you do it too?"

1) Is this an example of a tu quoque fallacy?

2) Who is committing the fallacy, the mother or the son?


If it is the son who is committing the fallacy (which I think is how the fallacy works), then is this not just an example of the son calling the mother a hypocrite? And does that mean that any accusation of hypocrisy is a logical fallacy?


And, as a slight derail to my own thread, why is hypocrisy wrong?

 

[GrowingSmaller]

you have it i think. hypocricy is wrong theoretically because truth is singular, and ethically because there are moral truths, so its not practical. tuquoque is also the mistake of inferring that becausex does such and such it is acceptable, rather than just inconsistent of them to disapprove. so, i have flaws but that doesn't justify copying.

 

[Loudmouth]

Can someone explain to me how the tu quoque argument works?

Lets say a mom smokes cigarettes and then tells her son that he shouldn't smoke cigarettes to which the son responds, "how can you tell me not to smoke when you do it too?"

1) Is this an example of a tu quoque fallacy?

2) Who is committing the fallacy, the mother or the son?


If it is the son who is committing the fallacy (which I think is how the fallacy works), then is this not just an example of the son calling the mother a hypocrite? And does that mean that any accusation of hypocrisy is a logical fallacy?


And, as a slight derail to my own thread, why is hypocrisy wrong?

The question is whether or not smoking is hazardous to one's health. The fact that someone smokes in no way refutes the argument that smoking is hazardous to one's health. Therefore, the tu quoque (i.e. "you too") is a type of red herring meant to distract away from the actual argument being put forth.

 

[juvenissun]

Can someone explain to me how the tu quoque argument works?

Lets say a mom smokes cigarettes and then tells her son that he shouldn't smoke cigarettes to which the son responds, "how can you tell me not to smoke when you do it too?"

1) Is this an example of a tu quoque fallacy?

2) Who is committing the fallacy, the mother or the son?


If it is the son who is committing the fallacy (which I think is how the fallacy works), then is this not just an example of the son calling the mother a hypocrite? And does that mean that any accusation of hypocrisy is a logical fallacy?


And, as a slight derail to my own thread, why is hypocrisy wrong?

Because it will hurt you.

 

[loveofourlord]

as said the to quoque fallacy is when, "You smoke too." is used in response to saying you shouldn't smoke.The fallacy is in the implication, "Y isn't wrong because X does it too."

 

[quatona]

Can someone explain to me how the tu quoque argument works?

Lets say a mom smokes cigarettes and then tells her son that he shouldn't smoke cigarettes to which the son responds, "how can you tell me not to smoke when you do it too?"

1) Is this an example of a tu quoque fallacy?

Basically, yes. Except he isn´t arguing, he is asking.

2) Who is committing the fallacy, the mother or the son?

The son.

If it is the son who is committing the fallacy (which I think is how the fallacy works), then is this not just an example of the son calling the mother a hypocrite?

No, he doesn´t call her anything. He is asking a question ("Is there a reason why you can smoke and I can´t?"), and he might expect a valid response to this question.
If it is (what we dont know) a rhethorical question it still is a (failed) attempt at a logical argument, but not calling her anything. He is arguing for his right to smoke - his intent is not (necessarily) to judge his mother´s character.

And does that mean that any accusation of hypocrisy is a logical fallacy?

The accusation of hypocrisy isn´t even an attempt at producing a logical argument, so I wouldn´t call it a logical fallacy.

And, as a slight derail to my own thread, why is hypocrisy wrong?

I don´t know that it is wrong - it just makes you look inconsistent.
Not acting up to your convictions is widely considered a character flaw.

 

[quatona]

The question is whether or not smoking is hazardous to one's health. The fact that someone smokes in no way refutes the argument that smoking is hazardous to one's health. Therefore, the tu quoque (i.e. "you too") is a type of red herring meant to distract away from the actual argument being put forth.

Except that the health-argument doesn´t show up in the example. Actually, the mother doesn´t give any reason at all.