Difference between revisions of "Reductio ad Hitlerum"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(→See Also: added one) |
m |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | '''Reductio ad Hitlerum''', also known as '''Argumentum ad Nazium''', the '''Hitler Card''',<ref>[http://www.fallacyfiles.org/adnazium.html Logical Fallacy: The Hitler Card]</ref> and '''Hitler Ate Sugar''',<ref>[http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/HitlerAteSugar Hitler Ate Sugar]</ref> is the [[fallacy]] that, where the subject expresses views that may have been held by [[Hitler]], the subject must of the same nature as Hitler. It is an example of the [[Guilt by Association]] fallacy and is commonly found in [[liberal]] [[smear campaign]]s against [[conservative]]s | + | '''Reductio ad Hitlerum''', also known as '''Argumentum ad Nazium''', the '''Hitler Card''',<ref>[http://www.fallacyfiles.org/adnazium.html Logical Fallacy: The Hitler Card]</ref> and '''Hitler Ate Sugar''',<ref>[http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/HitlerAteSugar Hitler Ate Sugar]</ref> is the [[fallacy]] that, where the subject expresses views that may have been held by [[Hitler]], the subject must of the same nature as Hitler. It is an example of the [[Guilt by Association]] fallacy and is commonly found in [[liberal]] [[smear campaign]]s against [[conservative]]s<ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,107426,00.html Ad Comparing Bush to Hitler Gets Heat], from [[Fox News]]</ref> and in arguments against evolution. It is commonly used even when Hitler demonstrably did not hold the view that is being attacked, although it is fallacious even if he did. |
==See Also== | ==See Also== | ||
*[[Genetic fallacy]] | *[[Genetic fallacy]] | ||
Revision as of 16:43, December 14, 2011
Reductio ad Hitlerum, also known as Argumentum ad Nazium, the Hitler Card,[1] and Hitler Ate Sugar,[2] is the fallacy that, where the subject expresses views that may have been held by Hitler, the subject must of the same nature as Hitler. It is an example of the Guilt by Association fallacy and is commonly found in liberal smear campaigns against conservatives[3] and in arguments against evolution. It is commonly used even when Hitler demonstrably did not hold the view that is being attacked, although it is fallacious even if he did.