Difference between revisions of "Two wrongs fallacy"
(→Overview: legit uses) |
m (Fallacies -> fallacies) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
==Overview== | ==Overview== | ||
| − | [[Category:logical | + | [[Category:logical fallacies]]The [[two wrongs fallacy]] refers to any statement where a given action which is known to be wrong is justified by the presumption that another person did, or would have done, the same thing under corresponding circumstances. The fallaciousness of such arguments is generally recognized in the common saying "two wrongs don't make a right". |
This fallacy has other common forms such as "he did it first". | This fallacy has other common forms such as "he did it first". | ||
Revision as of 14:15, 22 May 2008
Overview
The two wrongs fallacy refers to any statement where a given action which is known to be wrong is justified by the presumption that another person did, or would have done, the same thing under corresponding circumstances. The fallaciousness of such arguments is generally recognized in the common saying "two wrongs don't make a right".
This fallacy has other common forms such as "he did it first".
Legitimate uses
A legitimate use for this statement is when one is arguing mainly that the original perpetrator (the one who "did it first") has thereby lowered the generally accepted standards of behavior in some regard. If one does not agree with those new standards, however, it is inconsistent to argue that "he did it first" justifies a repeat of the action; it is only consistent to argue that the original perpetrator was in the wrong and has done harm to society.
If one believes or argues that the new standards are, in fact, reasonable, then it may also be reasonable to argue that subsequent actions along the same lines are acceptable.