A genetic fallacy is a logical mistake where the origin of an argument is used to support or discredit it without further evidence. It can be made in many ways and is often seen in appeals to authority. While the source of a claim may be relevant, other evidence should be used to avoid a genetic fallacy.
A genetic fallacy is a type of logical fallacy in which the origin or source of a particular argument or claim is used to support or discredit the argument. This type of mistake is typically made when someone uses the source of an argument or claim as a way to discredit or support an idea without further evidence or purpose. While the source of a claim or argument can certainly have an impact on the relevance or reliability of a claim, it generally shouldn’t be the only reason for rejection or acceptance. A genetic fallacy is often made during an appeal to authority, where someone tries to make an argument by constructing the author of the argument instead.
Essentially a fallacy of irrelevance, a genetic fallacy can be made in many different ways, whether to support or discredit a claim or argument. This type of mistake is often made by children who use the argument “My parents told me…” to back up any claim they make. In this type of argument, the child making the point believes everything their parents say, which is proof enough for the child. For someone else hearing the argument, however, this may not be enough and a genetic error has probably been made.
It is important for anyone attempting to analyze the rationale of an argument to remember that the origin or source of a claim may be relevant. Someone looking at a US legal opinion rendered by a Supreme Court justice should be aware of the importance of the person giving that opinion. In this situation, however, someone can easily make a genetic mistake simply stating that the opinion is valid because of its source. Even when the source of an argument or claim is important, other information should be used to support the argument and avoid a genetic fallacy on either side of the issue.
An appeal to authority also often uses a genetic error, so avoiding one error can help prevent the other. When someone appeals to authority, he supports the person who made a request, rather than the request itself. This type of argument or appeal is flawed, however, as anyone can lie or be factually inaccurate, regardless of experience or education. Additional evidence should be used to strengthen any argument beyond a simple appeal to authority, which can then help someone avoid a genetic fallacy and build a stronger argument.
Protect your devices with Threat Protection by NordVPN
