Tu Quoque Fallacy | Examples & Definition
The tu quoque fallacy occurs when someone responds to criticism by accusing the other party of inconsistency or hypocrisy. This tactic diverts attention from the original issue to an opponent’s supposed failure to follow their own principles.
Tu quoque is a form of ad hominem fallacy, meaning that it shifts focus away from the argument to the person presenting it.
Tu quoque fallacy examples
Examples of the tu quoque fallacy can often be found in contexts such as media and politics. The fallacy is generally used intentionally to deflect criticism by attacking the critic’s behavior or past actions, rather than addressing the argument.
In political discourse, the tu quoque fallacy is often used to draw scrutiny to public figures’ past inconsistencies.
Although examining a person’s track record is often legitimate, politicians often use tu quoque arguments to distract from current questions or criticisms about their own policies, beliefs, or behaviors.
Why do people commit the tu quoque fallacy?
Tu quoque fallacies are meant to divert attention from the actual argument, so this tactic is particularly useful when an individual lacks a strong counter-argument or wants to avoid discussing an uncomfortable topic.
By shifting focus to the critic’s own credibility, a tu quoque argument can provoke anger and frustration, undermining the critic’s overall effectiveness as a debater.
When it’s not committed intentionally as a rhetorical defensive strategy, the tu quoque fallacy is often the result of a reflexive emotional outburst. An example is the retort “You started it!” which is often used by children to deflect blame by highlighting the accuser’s similar or preceding misconduct.
Despite being fallacious, a tu quoque argument may appeal to an audience’s sense of fairness. It may seem that by highlighting the critic’s faults, the person committing the tu quoque has merely placed the two parties on equal footing and held them to the same standard.
How should you respond to a tu quoque fallacy?
To respond to a tu quoque fallacy, it’s important to first correctly identify the fallacy. Make sure that an accusation has the following qualities:
- Irrelevance to the argument: The retort lacks direct relevance and shifts attention away from the topic at hand.
- Accusation of hypocrisy: The response shifts focus to the opponent’s supposed hypocrisy or inconsistency.
- Avoidance of logical counter-argument: The accusation takes the place of a reasoned, productive response to a question or criticism.
When responding to a tu quoque fallacy, consider the following strategies to ensure that the conversation remains constructive:
- Acknowledge valid criticisms: Recognize valid points, and acknowledge mistakes or flaws when appropriate to maintain credibility.
- Separate the person from the argument: Emphasize that the argument’s soundness doesn’t depend on the behavior of the speaker.
- Avoid counter-fallacies: Remain logically consistent, and avoid the temptation to counter one ad hominem with another.
- Refocus on the original argument: Pivot back to the topic at hand without spending excessive time on the tu quoque accusation.
Frequently asked questions about tu quoque fallacy
- What’s the correct pronunciation of tu quoque?
-
The logical fallacy “tu quoque” is pronounced /ˈtuː ˈkwoʊkwiː/ (too-kwoh-kwee).
Other accepted pronunciations include the following:
- /ˈtyuː ˈkwoʊkwiː/ (tyoo-kwoh-kwee)
- /ˈtuː ˈkoʊkwiː/ (too-koh-kwee)
- What’s the difference between the tu quoque fallacy and the ad hominem fallacy?
-
The tu quoque fallacy is a specific kind of ad hominem fallacy.
- Ad hominem fallacies criticize a person for something irrelevant to the topic at hand.
- Tu quoque fallacies specifically criticize the person posing a question, criticism, or argument with an accusation of hypocrisy.
Both belong to the category of fallacies of relevance, also known as red herring fallacies.
- What’s the difference between tu quoque fallacies and whataboutism?
-
The tu quoque fallacy and whataboutism sometimes overlap, but they have distinct characteristics.
- Tu quoque is a form of ad hominem argument that counters criticism by pointing out hypocrisy in the critic’s behavior. It effectively says, “You do the same thing you’re criticizing me for.”
- Whataboutism is a broader tactic that involves responding to an accusation by deflecting to a different issue or making a counter-accusation. It shifts focus by essentially saying, “What about this other thing?”
Both are typically considered informal logical fallacies or specious approaches to argumentation.