Sometimes I'm looking at Twitter and seeing people reply to everything with "Thats a red herring", "Thats sealioning", "Thats fallacy xyz". Is there a fallacy for dismissing everything as a fallacy?

I know that the fallacy fallacy exists, however that seems distinct from it, as a fallacy fallacy (as I understand it) is correctly recognizing a fallacy and discarding the complete, sometimes still valid, argument because of it. However, what I mean is applying fallacies to everything to dismiss the argument, even when there is no fallacy present.

  • Obviously, it is a fallacy to assert that "everything is a fallacy": if an argument is valid, it isnot fallacious. – Mauro ALLEGRANZA May 3 '20 at 14:03
  • I agree, however I wondered if there is a common name for it, like with the fallacy fallacy – nn3112337 May 3 '20 at 14:16
  • 2
    Argumentum ad lapidem (appeal to the stone) "consists in dismissing a statement as absurd, invalid, or incorrect, without giving proof of its absurdity". – Conifold May 3 '20 at 14:49
  • Yeah thats probably close enough, thanks! – nn3112337 May 3 '20 at 15:08
  • The issue is that not every wrong assertion is a "logical fallacy". If I'm asserting that the Earth is flat, I'm not making a logical fallacy: I'm only saying bullsh... – Mauro ALLEGRANZA May 3 '20 at 16:00

I disagree with @polcott 's answer.

Firstly, I want to make it clear that a fallacy doesn't neccesarily equate the argument to falsehood, it merely states that an argument is less valid (or possibly invalid). For example, one could say that saying 97% of scientists believe Climate Change is merely a bandwagon fallacy and appeal to authority. Yes that is true, that arguement is fallicious in that way, but it doesn't stop climate change from being a real problem (I hope no one here is gonna debate me on this lol).

While there is no widely accepted fallacy specifically for declaring fallicious arguments to be false (at least to my knowledge), this does still equate to a few logical fallacy:

  • Hasty Generalization: Definition is self explanatory. This action is a hasty generalization as it basically claims "all fallacious arguments are false." This is clearly a hasty generalization.

  • Equivocation: definition: false equivocation. Again falacious is being equated to false.

  • Affirming the consequent: Just because false claims depend on fallicious arguments doesn't mean that fallicious arguments can only support false claims.

  • 1
    Fallacy does not mean that the argument is unclear, it means it is invalid. – Conifold May 6 '20 at 4:22
  • @Conifold you are correct, I meant something different, I am editing it. – Ankit May 6 '20 at 4:29
  • "For example, one could say that saying 97% of scientists believe Climate Change is merely a bandwagon fallacy and appeal to authority." Deductively yes, inductively (what all science is based on) no. Scientifically when one appeals to a strong consensus of qualified experts then the conclusion is construed as inductively sound. – polcott Jun 6 '20 at 18:57

Is there a logical fallacy for applying fallacies to everything?
This answer is explained more in depth below:
(1) The misapplication of a fallacy is an error and not called a fallacy.
(2) It is always incorrect to apply a fallacy to a valid argument, thus fallacies cannot be correctly applied to everything.

The catch-all fallacy is non-sequitur:
In philosophy, a formal fallacy, deductive fallacy, logical fallacy or non sequitur[1] (Latin for "it does not follow") is a pattern of reasoning rendered invalid by a flaw in its logical structure that can neatly be expressed in a standard logic system, for example propositional logic.[2] It is defined as a deductive argument that is invalid. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_fallacy

The non-sequitur fallacy is really just another way of saying that an argument is invalid:
A deductive argument is said to be valid if and only if it takes a form that makes it impossible for the premises to be true and the conclusion nevertheless to be false. Otherwise, a deductive argument is said to be invalid. https://www.iep.utm.edu/val-snd/

If it is impossible for the premises to be true and the conclusion to be false, then no fallacy has occurred, otherwise some fallacy has occurred. It is an error to say that valid reasoning has a fallacy, so it is an error to apply fallacies to everything.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.