{"id":4403,"date":"2013-09-06T09:00:01","date_gmt":"2013-09-06T14:00:01","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/thenonsequitur.com\/?p=4403"},"modified":"2013-09-06T09:02:41","modified_gmt":"2013-09-06T14:02:41","slug":"tu-quo-um-what","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/thenonsequitur.com\/?p=4403","title":{"rendered":"Tu quo&#8230; um, what?"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Here&#8217;s the setup for a <strong>meta-tu quoque<\/strong>.\u00c2\u00a0 <em>Stage 1:<\/em> A makes crazy claim.\u00c2\u00a0 <em>Stage 2:<\/em> B criticizes A for crazy claim.\u00c2\u00a0 <em>Stage 3:<\/em> A defends A&#8217;s claim by noting B&#8217;s criticism is based on a double-standard. <em>Stage 4:<\/em> B notes that A, in charging a double-standard, employs a double standard. I&#8217;ve noted elsewhere <a href=\"http:\/\/thenonsequitur.com\/?p=4165\">here<\/a> at the NS that some forms of double-standard arguments are relevant and argumentatively appropriate.\u00c2\u00a0 (And John, Colin, and I also published a <a href=\"http:\/\/www.academia.edu\/593058\/Tu_quoque_arguments_subjunctive_inconsistency_and_questions_of_relevance\">paper<\/a> on it a year ago.)<\/p>\n<p>OK, so here&#8217;s application.\u00c2\u00a0 Stage 1:\u00c2\u00a0 Brian Kilmeade of Fox News said he wouldn&#8217;t support the Syrian opposition groups, because they say &#8220;Allahu Akbar&#8221; when they score military successes.\u00c2\u00a0 Stage 2: John McCain criticizes Kilmeade for Islamophobia.\u00c2\u00a0 (<a href=\"http:\/\/www.huffingtonpost.com\/2013\/09\/03\/john-mccain-fox-news_n_3859871.html\">Here&#8217;s<\/a> the Huffpo review of the exchange.)\u00c2\u00a0 Stage 3: <a href=\"http:\/\/spectator.org\/archives\/2013\/09\/04\/obamas-half-assad-war\">George Neumayr<\/a> at <em>AmSpec<\/em> defends Kilmeade noting that McCain&#8217;s criticism deploys a double standard:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>When Fox News host Brian Kilmeade said on Tuesday that he didn\u00e2\u20ac\u2122t want to back Syrian rebels who scream \u00e2\u20ac\u0153Allahu Akbar!\u00e2\u20ac\u009d after bombing buildings, McCain, revealing the Islamophilia behind America\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s Arab-Spring foreign policy, replied that those chants don\u00e2\u20ac\u2122t bother him. \u00e2\u20ac\u0153They are moderates,\u00e2\u20ac\u009d he said, dismissing the chants as no more \u00e2\u20ac\u0153offensive\u00e2\u20ac\u009d than a Christian who says \u00e2\u20ac\u0153thank God.\u00e2\u20ac\u009d <strong>Too bad Kilmeade didn\u00e2\u20ac\u2122t ask McCain to give examples of Christians yelling \u00e2\u20ac\u0153thank God\u00e2\u20ac\u009d after slitting someone\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s throat<\/strong>.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>The first trouble is that Kilmeade is taking the speech act performed after a horrible deed to be identify the perpetrator as representative of the group that speech act indicates.\u00c2\u00a0 So because <em>a <\/em>Muslim terrorist says &#8220;Allahu Akbar&#8221; after a terrorist incident, those who say &#8220;Allahu Akbar&#8221; are dangerous radicals.\u00c2\u00a0 McCain&#8217;s reply is by way of counter-examples &#8211; Christians say &#8220;Thank God&#8221; all the time&#8230; that&#8217;s what the phrase is analogous to.\u00c2\u00a0 Neumayr&#8217;s case is that McCain&#8217;s double standard is not to take extreme behavior as representative.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"http:\/\/gawker.com\/religious-man-murders-friend-for-proving-god-doesnt-1257406513\">Here&#8217;s<\/a> stage 4: Religious man murders his friend after his friend tells him he&#8217;s an atheist.\u00c2\u00a0 We don&#8217;t take that as representative, do we?<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Here&#8217;s the setup for a meta-tu quoque.\u00c2\u00a0 Stage 1: A makes crazy claim.\u00c2\u00a0 Stage 2: B criticizes A for crazy claim.\u00c2\u00a0 Stage 3: A defends A&#8217;s claim by noting B&#8217;s criticism is based on a double-standard. Stage 4: B notes that A, in charging a double-standard, employs a double standard. I&#8217;ve noted elsewhere here at &hellip; <a href=\"https:\/\/thenonsequitur.com\/?p=4403\" class=\"more-link\">Continue reading <span class=\"screen-reader-text\">Tu quo&#8230; um, what?<\/span> <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":6,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[35,150,1261],"tags":[135,1736,801],"class_list":["post-4403","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-tu-quoque","category-bad-company","category-is-quoque","tag-ad-hominem-tu-quoque","tag-meta-tu-quoque","tag-tu-quoque-2"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/thenonsequitur.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4403","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/thenonsequitur.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/thenonsequitur.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thenonsequitur.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/6"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thenonsequitur.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=4403"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/thenonsequitur.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4403\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":4406,"href":"https:\/\/thenonsequitur.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4403\/revisions\/4406"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/thenonsequitur.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=4403"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thenonsequitur.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=4403"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thenonsequitur.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=4403"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}