This fallacy occurs when one rejects an arguer’s claim by attacking the arguer’s action, not the argument itself. Appeal to hypocrisy is also called “look who’s talking” or “ tu quoque,” which means “you too.”
Let’s examine the following example:
What follows is a summary of the arguments in the video:
My mom sets a family digital curfew, which according to her can improve our sleep. Why should I give up my phone two hours before I go to bed? My mom often plays video games before bedtime.
Let’s analyze the arguments. You have two attempts to complete each item.
* 1. What is the arguer’s claim? (Please select the best answer.)
A. Why should I give up my phone two hours before I go to bed?
B. I do not have to give up my phone two hours before I go to bed.
C. My mom sets a family digital curfew, which according to her can improve our sleep.
D. My mom often plays video games before bedtime.
Very close, but not quite! A is not the best answer. A claim should be a statement, which is a sentence that can be either true or false. According to the definition of the term “claim”, the question in option A is not a statement, and thus it cannot be the claim in the argument. (A question cannot be either true or false.)
That’s right! B is the best answer. The statement in option B presents the position that the arguer would like to defend.
The statement in option C does not present the arguer’s claim or position. It is a reason that the arguer’s mother uses to support her position.
The statement in option D does not present the arguer’s claim. Although the statement is not relevant to the argument, it is the reason that the arguer uses to support the claim.
Option B is the best answer. The statement in option B presents the position that the arguer would like to defend.
What follows is a summary of the teen’s argument:
Statement 1: My mom, who sets a family digital curfew, does not observe the curfew herself.
Statement 2: I do not have to observe the curfew, either.
* 2. What is the reason that the teen uses to support his position? (Please select the best answer.)
A. My mom, who sets a family digital curfew, does not observe the curfew herself.
B. I do not have to observe the curfew, either.
Good job! Although the statement is not relevant to the argument, it is the reason that the arguer uses to support the claim.
This statement is not the reason. It presents the position that the arguer would like to defend.
The following statement is the reason: My mom, who sets a family digital curfew, does not observe the curfew herself. Although this statement is not relevant to the argument, it is the reason that the arguer uses to support the claim.
Obviously, the mother does not practice what she preaches, but what should be under discussion is the mother’s argument, not her action. First, let’s present the mother’s argument in standard format:
Premise/ reason: The family digital curfew can improve your health.
Claim/ position: You should observe the family digital curfew.
Next, let’s review the teen’s counter argument, in which the teen attacks his mother’s action rather than the argument itself. Here is an analysis of the teen’s counter argument:
Premise/ reason: My mom, who sets a family digital curfew, does not observe the curfew herself
Claim/ position: I do not have to observe the curfew, either.
The teen’s reason, which describes what his mother does, is not relevant to the argument that she presents. The fallacy of relevance that the teen commits is called “appeal to hypocrisy.”