Eight Logical Fallacies Commonly Used By Politically Correct People
It's important to know the logical fallacies involved in promoting the sin of political correctness. It's a weapon designed to silence people whose arguments CANNOT be refuted. So what are some of the fallacies used in political correctness? Here are eight commonly used weapons to promote the stupidity of being politically correct:
1.) Ad Hominem
In the quest to silence Christians, it's a very common tactic to say that if a person is a Christian then you shouldn't listen to that person. More of then than not, Christians are labeled to be wrong simply because they are Christians. This would mean discrediting any facts and figures Christians may share with the public.
2.) Appeal to tradition
It's very common to appeal to tradition to justify sinful practices. Let's just say it becomes politically incorrect to tell Muslims that they're not saved because they have sprang out from several generations of Islam. This may also say that as long as it's done for several generations then it must be correct. One way to refute it is to say that maybe they should accept human sacrifice since it's been done for several generations.
3.) Argument from silence
It's very easy to say that silence means yes. But it doesn't always mean yes because the person may be hesitant to say no. Sometimes a person refuses to debater because it's no use arguing with a person who never listens. It's better not to argue with a foolish person as such people can beat the smart people with their experience.
4.) Guilt by association
It can be as stupid as since Christians hate homosexuality and the ISIS hate homosexuality therefore hating homosexuality is evil. This is one of the easiest ways to make an argument. What's often ignored is that the moral standards are not other people. One good way to refute this argument is by saying something like that the late John Paul II loves chocolate but that doesn't make eating chocolate wrong.
5.) Non sequitur
There's always the assumption that disagreement automatically equals hate. One good example is how homosexuals got mad that Christians don't condone to their wrongdoings and called them as pretentious hypocrites for sending aid after the homosexual night club attack by an ISIS member.
6.) Poisoning the well
False accusation is a very common ground to discredit people. They may produce fake evidence or use people's love for gossip to destroy the Christian's reputation. It's already expected as Matthew 5:10-12 already warn that Christians will be hated by the world. On the other hand, blessed indeed are Christians who are wrongfully persecuted for the cause of Christ.
7.) Special pleading
This is another term for double standard. One of the worst tactics is to call Christians as haters for simply refusing to bake a cake for a homosexual couple. On the other hand, they may even invite a statesman from a Muslim country who says homosexuals should be massacred to speak in a secular university. They simply give everyone rights but Christians.
8.) Straw man argument
Many times, politically correct people always say that they've won arguments even when they haven't. They may set up imaginary debates or imaginary victories. One of their favorite tactics may be that when a person walks away from the argument that they assume they've won.
See also:
1.) Ad Hominem
In the quest to silence Christians, it's a very common tactic to say that if a person is a Christian then you shouldn't listen to that person. More of then than not, Christians are labeled to be wrong simply because they are Christians. This would mean discrediting any facts and figures Christians may share with the public.
2.) Appeal to tradition
It's very common to appeal to tradition to justify sinful practices. Let's just say it becomes politically incorrect to tell Muslims that they're not saved because they have sprang out from several generations of Islam. This may also say that as long as it's done for several generations then it must be correct. One way to refute it is to say that maybe they should accept human sacrifice since it's been done for several generations.
3.) Argument from silence
It's very easy to say that silence means yes. But it doesn't always mean yes because the person may be hesitant to say no. Sometimes a person refuses to debater because it's no use arguing with a person who never listens. It's better not to argue with a foolish person as such people can beat the smart people with their experience.
4.) Guilt by association
It can be as stupid as since Christians hate homosexuality and the ISIS hate homosexuality therefore hating homosexuality is evil. This is one of the easiest ways to make an argument. What's often ignored is that the moral standards are not other people. One good way to refute this argument is by saying something like that the late John Paul II loves chocolate but that doesn't make eating chocolate wrong.
5.) Non sequitur
There's always the assumption that disagreement automatically equals hate. One good example is how homosexuals got mad that Christians don't condone to their wrongdoings and called them as pretentious hypocrites for sending aid after the homosexual night club attack by an ISIS member.
6.) Poisoning the well
False accusation is a very common ground to discredit people. They may produce fake evidence or use people's love for gossip to destroy the Christian's reputation. It's already expected as Matthew 5:10-12 already warn that Christians will be hated by the world. On the other hand, blessed indeed are Christians who are wrongfully persecuted for the cause of Christ.
7.) Special pleading
This is another term for double standard. One of the worst tactics is to call Christians as haters for simply refusing to bake a cake for a homosexual couple. On the other hand, they may even invite a statesman from a Muslim country who says homosexuals should be massacred to speak in a secular university. They simply give everyone rights but Christians.
8.) Straw man argument
Many times, politically correct people always say that they've won arguments even when they haven't. They may set up imaginary debates or imaginary victories. One of their favorite tactics may be that when a person walks away from the argument that they assume they've won.
See also: