Question

...
Jason Mathias

What fallacy is this?

Person T did something illegal and corrupt.
People D take legal action against person T.
Person T claims people D are idiots and therefor that means person T is innocent.
asked on Thursday, Oct 17, 2019 09:31:22 PM by Jason Mathias

Top Categories Suggested by Community

Comments

Want to get notified of all questions as they are asked? Update your mail preferences and turn on "Instant Notification."

Reason: Books I & II

This book is based on the first five years of The Dr. Bo Show, where Bo takes a critical thinking-, reason-, and science-based approach to issues that matter with the goal of educating and entertaining. Every chapter in the book explores a different aspect of reason by using a real-world issue or example.

Part one is about how science works even when the public thinks it doesn't. Part two will certainly ruffle some feathers by offering a reason- and science-based perspective on issues where political correctness has gone awry. Part three provides some data-driven advice for your health and well-being. Part four looks at human behavior and how we can better navigate our social worlds. In part five we put on our skeptical goggles and critically examine a few commonly-held beliefs. In the final section, we look at a few ways how we all can make the world a better place.

Get 20% off this book and all Bo's books*. Use the promotion code: websiteusers

* This is for the author's bookstore only. Applies to autographed hardcover, audiobook, and ebook.

Get the Book

Answers

...
Steven Hobbs
0
non sequitur
The premise does not support the conclusion.
answered on Friday, Oct 18, 2019 01:22:38 AM by Steven Hobbs

Comments
...
mchasewalker
0
D’s charge T with being a corrupt criminal
T claims D ’s are idiots
Therefore T is innocent

Argumentum Ad hominem

Corruption is a crime
Insulting one’s accusers is not a defense
answered on Friday, Oct 18, 2019 03:11:06 AM by mchasewalker

Comments
...
skips777
0
People are idiots, therefore, T is innocent.....ad hominem
answered on Friday, Oct 18, 2019 03:30:53 AM by skips777

Comments
...
Bo Bennett, PhD
0
The relevant part is "Person T claims people D are idiots and therefor that means person T is innocent." Idiots can be correct about the guilt of person T regardless of any intellectual deficiencies they might have. This is a classic Ad Hominem (abusive) . More generally, it is also a non-sequitur .
answered on Friday, Oct 18, 2019 06:35:56 AM by Bo Bennett, PhD

Comments
...
Citizen Irrelevant
0
Although there is an ad hominem component ( the perjorative insult leveled ), the fallacy seems a straightforward non-sequitur.
answered on Friday, Oct 18, 2019 06:49:42 PM by Citizen Irrelevant

Comments