If someone claims they're driven by a moral principle, then you check they're consistent about the principle.

  • frightful_hobgoblin@lemmy.ml
    ·
    2 months ago

    Example:

    Tommy says:"You can't support the Provos because they committed war crimes."

    His syllogism is:

    • Major premise: No group who commits war crimes can be supported [this is implied/hidden]

    • Minor premise: The Provos committed war crimes

    • Conclusion: therefore the PIRA cannot be supported

    Now if I say, "Do you support the Thatcher government? They committed lots of war crimes?", I am asking is he sincere about his major premise.

    If he's not sincere about his major premise/moral principle, then he is insincere about it, he is hypocritically moralising to score rhetorical points.

    If he is true to his principle, he will apply it across the board.

    So whataboutism is good and reasonable.