Special pleading
m (cap) |
(→Examples) |
||
| Line 22: | Line 22: | ||
*The seemingly hypocritical nature of some politicians regarding [[drug]] use or sexual misdemeanors. | *The seemingly hypocritical nature of some politicians regarding [[drug]] use or sexual misdemeanors. | ||
| − | *That [[gay]] people can't [[marriage|marry]] each other, just because. While gay people are different to straight people - by virtue of being gay - this isn't sufficient reasoning to count them as an exception to people who don't believe in the rhetorical statement "marriage is between one MAN and one WOMAN". | + | *That [[gay]] people can't [[marriage|marry]] each other, just because. While gay people are different to straight people - by virtue of being gay - gay marriage proponents contend this isn't sufficient reasoning to count them as an exception to people who don't believe in the rhetorical statement "marriage is between one MAN and one WOMAN". |
*Biblical morality takes massive amounts of special pleading from [[Biblical literalism|Biblical literalists]] who insist that morality can only come from the Bible. They are very happy to follow some rules (shunning gay men) but not others (selling their daughters into slavery, stoning disobedient children, eschewing shellfish) - even though the Bible, which they claim can be the ''only'' source of their moral decision making is quite silent on what parts of it you can happily ignore. | *Biblical morality takes massive amounts of special pleading from [[Biblical literalism|Biblical literalists]] who insist that morality can only come from the Bible. They are very happy to follow some rules (shunning gay men) but not others (selling their daughters into slavery, stoning disobedient children, eschewing shellfish) - even though the Bible, which they claim can be the ''only'' source of their moral decision making is quite silent on what parts of it you can happily ignore. | ||
Revision as of 20:43, 26 October 2011
| Part of the series on |
| Key articles |
| General logic |
| Bad logic |
Special pleading is a formal logical fallacy where a participant demands special considerations for a particular premise of theirs. Usually this is because in order for their argument to work, they need to provide some way to get out of a logical inconsistency. Therefore, they introduce a "special case" or an exception to their rules.
While this is acceptable in genuine special cases, it becomes a formal fallacy when a person doesn't adequately justify why the case is special.
Structure
The most general structure of this argument runs something like the following:
- A person accepts a particular set of standards.
- This person then applies these standards to all others, seemingly consistently and without exception.
- Said person then finds themselves hindered by their own set of standards - this can induce cognitive dissonance.
- Being unwilling to accept the hindrance caused by their own standards, a person simply declares themselves to be a "special case" without due reasoning.
- They then exclude themselves from their own standards to make their case.
This is a fallacy because s/he claiming that he is exempt from certain principles or standards yet s/he provides no good reason for his exemption. A real exception would either be easily justifiable or apparent in the conditions they make in the first place. Such as "these standards apply to x, y, and z because of a, b and c" and people can then agree with this and the reasonings. Simply demanding that an exception be made isn't good enough.
Examples
- In the Thomistic cosmological argument argument for the existence of God, everything requires a cause. However, proponents of the argument then create a special case where God doesn't need a cause, but they can't say why in any particularly rigorous fashion.
- The seemingly hypocritical nature of some politicians regarding drug use or sexual misdemeanors.
- That gay people can't marry each other, just because. While gay people are different to straight people - by virtue of being gay - gay marriage proponents contend this isn't sufficient reasoning to count them as an exception to people who don't believe in the rhetorical statement "marriage is between one MAN and one WOMAN".
- Biblical morality takes massive amounts of special pleading from Biblical literalists who insist that morality can only come from the Bible. They are very happy to follow some rules (shunning gay men) but not others (selling their daughters into slavery, stoning disobedient children, eschewing shellfish) - even though the Bible, which they claim can be the only source of their moral decision making is quite silent on what parts of it you can happily ignore.
See also
| Articles about logical fallacies | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Formal fallacies | |||||
| Affirming the consequent | Denying the antecedent |
Special pleading | |||
| Informal fallacies | |||||
| Red herrings | |||||
| Conditional fallacies | |||||
| Fallacious argument styles | |||||