Special pleading
|
|
Special pleading is a form of spurious argumentation. Special pleading for a position in a dispute introduces favorable details or excludes unfavorable details by alleging a need to apply additional considerations without proper criticism of these considerations themselves.
The lack of criticism may be a simple overlook (e.g., a reference to common sense) or an application of double standard.
A more difficult case is when a possible criticism is made relatively immune to investigation. This immunity may take the forms of:
- reference to vocabulary that is owned by a distinct community with sole rights to assess meaning and application
- unexplained claims of exemption from principles commonly thought relevant to the subject matter
- claims to data that are inherently unverifiable, perhaps because too remote or impossible to define clearly
- assertion that the opponent lacks the qualifications necessary to comprehend a point of view
- assertion that literally nobody has the qualifications necessary to comprehend a point of view
In the classic distinction among material, psychological, and logical fallacies, 1 special pleading most likely falls within the category of psychological fallacy, as it would seem to relate to "lip service", rationalization, and diversion (abandonment of discussion).
In philosophy it is assumed that where a distinction is claimed a relevant basis for the distinction should exist and be substantiated. Special pleading is a subversion of this assumption.
Example
- Sure, my client may have stolen, but he is poor, therefore it is excusable.
- You may disagree with my tax plan, but I've taken many more economic classes than you so you should give me the benefit of the doubt.
Footnotes and external links
- Web sites offering definitions of "special pleading": [1] (http://www.fallacyfiles.org/specplea.html), [2] (http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/special-pleading.html), [3] (http://www.cuyamaca.net/bruce.thompson/Fallacies/specialpleading.asp)
- 1 This division is found in introductory texts such as Fallacy: The Counterfeit of Argument, W. Ward Fearnside, Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1959.
- The One-Sidedness Fallacy (http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/courses/inflogic/inflhome.htm) by Peter Suber.