Yep, U-2 is today's fallacy. Except it's not spelled that way. The Latin spelling of U-2 is "Tu quoque". But it means "you too". And, it is a type of ad hominem argument.
Basically tu quoque is an accusation of hypocrisy.
Here's an example:
Joe Camel: You really shouldn't smoke. It's bad for your health.
Surgeon General: What do you know? You smoke 3 packs a day.
The surgeon general in this case has used a "tu quoque" or "you too" argument. Whether or not smoking is bad for your health is the topic here and it is irrelevant whether or not the person saying it smokes.
But here's a more fun version with a fun link.
Bono: Christians around the world don't care about what's going on in Africa. They don't give nearly enough to relief work in Africa.
Critic: Well, you should talk, Bono, you spent $1700 to have your hat flown from London to Italy first class.
There you have it.
Tu quoque, an irrelevant accusation of hypocrisy.
4 comments:
I'm sensing a disturbing theme...
Is this becoming the Linda Dugan Studmuffin Slideshow? Enough with the pics of hunky men, more deductive reasoning.
Please?
I get what you are saying.
Bono is still an extravagent loser for having his hat flown to him though.
It was the only photo of U-2 that I could find, OKAY!!!!
Oh, and Chris, you are correct. If the question being debated was, "Is Bono an extravagent loser," the answer would be "Yes" and the hat thing would be the perfect argument!
Would the question "How do you spell 'extravagant'?" be classified as a Red Herring? Then, I suppose an "extravagent" as a noun could refer to a refined gentleman who happens to be a spendthrift.
--Askov MN all-7th grade spelling champion (defeated in round 1 of Pine County finals)
Post a Comment