search

Self-Righteousness Fallacy

Description: Assuming that just because your intentions are good, you have the truth or facts on your side. Also see righteousness fallacy.

Logical Form:

You make claim X.

You have good intentions.

Therefore, X is true.

Example #1:

Ricki: Do you think aborted fetuses have feelings?
Jenni: Any honorable and kind person would have to say they do have feelings. So yes.

Explanation: Jenni might be the queen of honor with kindness oozing from her puppy-dog eyes, but these qualities are independent of one’s ability to know facts or come to an accurate conclusion based on available data.

Example #2:

Jenni: Is a fetus a human being?
Ricki: No, because I am not a monster and would never suggest killing an unwanted human being is okay.

Explanation: Ricki is making a claim about a fetus and using the fact that she is “not a monster” to support the claim, which is independent of her intentions.

Exception: This relates to facts, not subjective truth. We can use the idea of righteousness to conclude how we feel about something or someone. For example,

Jenni: Do you consider a fetus to be as valuable as a human being?
Ricki: No, because I am not a monster and would never suggest killing an unwanted human being is okay.

Fun Fact: Self-righteous is defined as having or characterized by a certainty, especially an unfounded one, that one is totally correct or morally superior. The self-righteousness fallacy follows a more generic definition of being correct because of “good intentions.”

References:

This a logical fallacy frequently used on the Internet. No academic sources could be found.

Questions about this fallacy? Ask our community!

Eat Meat... Or Don't.

Roughly 95% of Americans don’t appear to have an ethical problem with animals being killed for food, yet all of us would have a serious problem with humans being killed for food. What does an animal lack that a human has that justifies killing the animal for food but not the human?

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.

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