Pointing out a person's hypocrisy is not always a logical fallacy
the verdict
SUPPORTED
the evidence backs this
confidence 83/100
Pointing out a person's hypocrisy is not always a logical fallacy; in many contexts, evaluating a speaker's sincerity, consistency, or authority provides legitimate evidential and dialectical value.
Evidence for · 4
Lightening up on the Ad Hominem
2008 · cited by 18
Pointing out an opponent's inconsistency or hypocrisy (tu quoque) is often a provisional and non-fallacious way to question their case-making bona fides.
See more details
More for · 3
Tu Quoque Arguments and the Significance of Hypocrisy
2008 · cited by 12
Arguments from hypocrisy can be indirectly relevant by challenging a speaker's authority, sincerity, or highlighting the impracticability of their proposals.
Attacking Character: Ad Hominem Argument and Virtue Epistemology
2010 · cited by 11
Virtue epistemology shows that attacking a speaker's character or intellectual vices can be legitimate in concluding we should not accept claims solely on their say-so.
Virtues, Evidence, and Ad Hominem Arguments
2015 · cited by 4
An evidentialist approach to argument appraisal supports the view that certain ad hominem appeals can be legitimate without relying on virtue theory.