|
Mocking the positionThis is something I've come across many times, though I'm not sure it's a fallacy or just an unscrupulous debate tactic. I don't really think it's an appeal to ridicule, as that involves exaggerating an argument beyond reason. Basically, instead of giving an counterargument or defense to a claim/argument, the opposition simply laughs at/mocks the arguer's position in order to diminish it's validity. Some examples: "You clearly don't clean around the house, seeing as I left this house for a week and came back to an absolute pigsty." "Yeah sure, I never do anything at all, you're totally not whinging right now!"
"Your performance at work goes down when you drink. You've started drinking again, and immediately your performance started to suffer." "Yeah of course it's the drinking, you're so right, aren't I just a slacker hahaha"
Similarly, I also recently saw some well-known internet personalities being accused of slacking off on work in order to further a business venture, and they replied, not with a defense/explanation, but by simply mocking their fans for noticing it at all.
Basically, the opponent is not giving a counterargument to the claim, he/she just derisively mocks the position, and by extension, the arguer. What would you say this is? |
|||
asked on Tuesday, Nov 02, 2021 05:46:11 PM by Mr. Brinstar | ||||
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."
As you start to list properties that the animal lacks to justify eating them, you begin to realize that some humans also lack those properties, yet we don’t eat those humans. Is this logical proof that killing and eating animals for food is immoral? Don’t put away your steak knife just yet.
In Eat Meat… Or Don’t, we examine the moral arguments for and against eating meat with both philosophical and scientific rigor. This book is not about pushing some ideological agenda; it’s ultimately a book about critical thinking.
* This is for the author's bookstore only. Applies to autographed hardcover, audiobook, and ebook.
|
Not an argument. It's rhetoric; often sarcastic, but sometimes just directly insulting. Now, if the second person insults the first person (and uses that to dismiss their claim), it is now fallacious (ad hominem (abusive)). For instance: Joan: I really think your performance at work is affected by the amount you drink. Jasper: Well I think you're stupid, so it can't be anything to do with that. This is a non-fallacious example, similar to the one you gave: Joan: Honestly, you shouldn't drink so much; it's probably getting in the way of your work. Jasper: Yeah, SURE. It couldn't be anything else, right? |
answered on Wednesday, Nov 03, 2021 12:17:17 PM by TrappedPrior (RotE) | |
TrappedPrior (RotE) Suggested These Categories |
|
Comments |
|
|
|
This is called "Passive Aggressive Behavior". |
answered on Wednesday, Nov 03, 2021 10:53:08 AM by Kostas Oikonomou | |
Kostas Oikonomou Suggested These Categories |
|
Comments |
|
|