Argumentum ad lazarum: Difference between revisions
Stepp-Wulf (talk | contribs) m add some |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
'''Argumentum ad lazarum''' or '''appeal to poverty''' is the [[logical fallacy]] of thinking a conclusion is correct because the speaker is poor. It is named after [[Lazarus and Dives|Lazarus]], a beggar in |
'''Argumentum ad lazarum''' or '''appeal to poverty''' is the [[logical fallacy]] of thinking a conclusion is correct because the speaker is poor. It is named after [[Lazarus and Dives|Lazarus]], a beggar in a [[New Testament]] [[parable]] who receives his reward in the afterlife. |
||
This is popularly exploited as the statement, "Poor, but honest." |
This is popularly exploited as the statement, "Poor, but honest." |
||
Revision as of 01:09, 12 January 2008
Argumentum ad lazarum or appeal to poverty is the logical fallacy of thinking a conclusion is correct because the speaker is poor. It is named after Lazarus, a beggar in a New Testament parable who receives his reward in the afterlife.
This is popularly exploited as the statement, "Poor, but honest."
Examples
Family farms are struggling to get by so when they say we need to protect them, they must be on to something.
The homeless tell us it’s hard to find housing. Thus it must be.
The monks have forsworn all material possessions. They must have achieved enlightenment.
All you need to know about the civil war in that country is that the rebels live in mud huts, while the general who sends troops against them sits in a luxurious, air-conditioned office.
The opposite is the argumentum ad crumenam.
References
 |
| Formal |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Informal |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
