Those who’ve decorated their social media accounts with Ukrainian flag decals but had nothing at all to say about the U.S.-sponsored Saudi genocide in Yemen these past eight years get really annoyed when they’re reminded of this inconsistency. These same people want the international community to shun and isolate Russia, but can’t say whether the United States deserves the same punishment for its numerous 21st century war crimes in Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, and Libya.
actually, according to formal sentential logic, hyprocrisy is irrelevant and moreover not sufficient reason to dismiss a piece of argumentation. unfortunately, formal logic has nothing to do with common sense or feelings.
The central aim of the article is to imply that those donning UA flags are hypocrites for not supporting other nations who have suffered imperialist oppression. From a logical standpoint, the fact that somebody is a hypocrite is insufficient justification to dispense with their argument: hypocrisy is not a formal (nor an informal) fallacy of logic.
The argument encapsulated by displaying support for Ukraine could charitably be stated as: the right to national self-determination is sacrosanct.
actually, according to formal sentential logic, hyprocrisy is irrelevant and moreover not sufficient reason to dismiss a piece of argumentation. unfortunately, formal logic has nothing to do with common sense or feelings.
what piece of argumentation are you referring to here? You may have missed the point, which wasn't about refuting an argument.
The central aim of the article is to imply that those donning UA flags are hypocrites for not supporting other nations who have suffered imperialist oppression. From a logical standpoint, the fact that somebody is a hypocrite is insufficient justification to dispense with their argument: hypocrisy is not a formal (nor an informal) fallacy of logic.
The argument encapsulated by displaying support for Ukraine could charitably be stated as: the right to national self-determination is sacrosanct.