Tu Quoque
Fallacy Summary: Dismiss criticism by accusing the accuser.
Pointing out hypocrisy shifts focus away from the original charge without addressing its validity. Research context: Informal-logic and argumentation research treats fallacies as structural problems in reasoning. A conclusion can sound persuasive while still being weak if the link between premises, evidence, and conclusion is not valid. Pattern-specific focus: Dismiss criticism by accusing the accuser. Practical review method: separate factual claims from interpretation, check source quality, and test whether the conclusion survives alternative explanations.
“거칠고 어 욕설도 굉장히 많이 해요. 그렇기 때문에 저희 선수들도 어 물러서지 않고 같이 욕하면 욕해 주고 어 발로 차면 저희도 발로 차고 같이 대응해야 될 것 같습니다. 네.”
Justifies own team's potential bad behavior by pointing to opponent's behavior
How to recognize tu quoque yourself
- A rhetorical move replaces proof (for example, popularity, authority, or insult).
- Causation is claimed without ruling out alternatives or coincidence.
- The argument is reduced to an artificial either/or choice.
- Emotion is used to drive agreement where evidence should carry the burden.
Verification questions
- Which premise is doing the critical work, and is it actually supported?
- Does the conclusion logically follow, or does rhetoric bridge the gap?
- What alternative explanation would still fit the observed facts?
Failed to load people summary; Failed to load publications summary; Failed to load article summary
No cohort chart data available.
High offenders
Authors
No offenders available.
Publications
No offenders available.