Follow TV Tropes

Following

History Main / AppealToRidicule

Go To



Also, just because an argument uses ridicule does not mean it runs afoul of this. A person who delivers a withering, logically sound counterattack in a mocking, rude manner is being a jerk. If the argument is still sound, it stands regardless of how insulting the phrasing is.

to:

Also, just because an argument uses ridicule does not mean it runs afoul of this. A person who delivers a withering, logically sound counterattack in a mocking, rude manner is being a jerk. If the argument is still sound, it stands regardless of how insulting the phrasing is.
is. It only becomes a fallacy when the arguer fails to explain ''why'' what they are arguing against is stupid or ridiculous and [[TakeOurWordForIt just expects you to go with it]]


* ''Series/PennAndTellerBullshit'' uses many an AppealToRidicule when they believe the argument of their opposition would be obviously wrong to the audience. Since they used the same arrogant, condescending tone when making actual good points, it fit in to the show.

to:

* ''Series/PennAndTellerBullshit'' uses many an AppealToRidicule this often, when they believe the argument of their opposition would be obviously wrong to the audience. Since they used the same arrogant, condescending tone when making actual good points, it fit in to the show.


Also, just because an argument uses ridicule does not mean it runs afoul of this trope. A person who delivers a withering, logically sound counterattack in a mocking, rude manner is being a jerk. If the argument is still sound, it stands regardless of how insulting the phrasing is.

to:

Also, just because an argument uses ridicule does not mean it runs afoul of this trope.this. A person who delivers a withering, logically sound counterattack in a mocking, rude manner is being a jerk. If the argument is still sound, it stands regardless of how insulting the phrasing is.



!!! Looks like Appeal to Ridicule--and *is*

* Any argument that the opponent's views are so ridiculous that they deserve only ridicule. Note that such a claim can be used to justify ridiculing views that are perfectly true.

!!! Looks like Appeal to Ridicule--and *is not*

to:


!!! Looks like Appeal to Ridicule--and *is*

* Any argument that the opponent's views are so ridiculous that they deserve only ridicule. Note that such a claim can be used to justify ridiculing views that are perfectly true.

!!! Looks like Appeal to Ridicule--and *is not*
this fallacy but is not


* Ray Comfort, otherwise known as "Banana Man" is famous for his man on the street interviews, in which he (often accompanied by sidekick Kirk Cameron) reduce evolution to a series of scientific impossibilities and absurdities, employing virtually every logical fallacy in the book, notably the appeal to ridicule and its cousin, the straw man fallacy. In addition to this, expecting a layman to have a relatively advanced knowledge of biology is a bit problematic in and of itself; your average pedestrian might not be able to explain why binary code makes a computer work, but that certainly doesn't negate its effectiveness. It's also hard to believe that in all his years of doing this, he has never encountered ANYONE capable of competently explaining natural selection as the driving force behind evolution (in fact he has been told evolution really works by biologists, but still rejects their explanations). The videos in which he interviews random people who never manage to give him good answers show clear signs of editing, making people suspect he cherry picks the worst for this purpose.

to:

* Ray Comfort, otherwise known as "Banana Man" is famous for his man on the street interviews, in which he (often accompanied by sidekick Kirk Cameron) reduce reduces evolution to a series of scientific impossibilities and absurdities, employing virtually every logical fallacy in the book, notably the appeal to ridicule and its cousin, the straw man fallacy. In addition to this, expecting a layman to have a relatively advanced knowledge of biology is a bit problematic in and of itself; your average pedestrian might not be able to explain why binary code makes a computer work, but that certainly doesn't negate its effectiveness. It's also hard to believe that in all his years of doing this, he has never encountered ANYONE capable of competently explaining natural selection as the driving force behind evolution (in fact he has been told evolution really works by biologists, but still rejects their explanations). The videos in which he interviews random people who never manage to give him good answers show clear signs of editing, making people suspect he cherry picks the worst for this purpose.


* Ray Comfort, otherwise known as "Banana Man" is famous for his man on the street interviews, in which he (often accompanied by sidekick Kirk Cameron) reduce evolution to a series of scientific impossibilities and absurdities, employing virtually every logical fallacy in the book, notably the appeal to ridicule and its cousin, the straw man fallacy. In addition to this, expecting a layman to have a relatively advanced knowledge of biology is a bit problematic in and of itself; your average pedestrian might not be able to explain why binary code makes a computer work, but that certainly doesn't negate its effectiveness. It's also hard to believe that in all his years of doing this, he has never encountered ANYONE capable of competently explaining natural selection as the driving force behind evolution (in fact he has been told evolution really works by biologists, but still rejects their explanations).

to:

* Ray Comfort, otherwise known as "Banana Man" is famous for his man on the street interviews, in which he (often accompanied by sidekick Kirk Cameron) reduce evolution to a series of scientific impossibilities and absurdities, employing virtually every logical fallacy in the book, notably the appeal to ridicule and its cousin, the straw man fallacy. In addition to this, expecting a layman to have a relatively advanced knowledge of biology is a bit problematic in and of itself; your average pedestrian might not be able to explain why binary code makes a computer work, but that certainly doesn't negate its effectiveness. It's also hard to believe that in all his years of doing this, he has never encountered ANYONE capable of competently explaining natural selection as the driving force behind evolution (in fact he has been told evolution really works by biologists, but still rejects their explanations). The videos in which he interviews random people who never manage to give him good answers show clear signs of editing, making people suspect he cherry picks the worst for this purpose.



* Sometimes, this trope is used to misrepresent a lawsuit as a FrivolousLawsuit. For example, the infamous "Hot Coffee Case" was ''not'' frivolous; people think it was about someone who didn't "know" her coffee would be hot and/or handled it recklessly, when in fact [=McDonald's=] ''was'' serving their coffee hotter than safety standards and had been sued for doing so many times before the lawsuit was even made. Even if you expect coffee to be hot, you don't expect to need treatment for third-degree burns on your genitals after spilling a little of it. Even so "coffee is supposed to be hot" remains the mockery of this, as featured in ''{{Series/Seinfeld}}'', though Kramer's retort on the same show would be valid: "Not ''that'' hot".

to:

* Sometimes, this trope is used to misrepresent a lawsuit as a FrivolousLawsuit. For example, the infamous "Hot Coffee Case" was ''not'' frivolous; people think it was about someone who didn't "know" her coffee would be hot and/or handled it recklessly, when in fact [=McDonald's=] ''was'' serving their coffee hotter than safety standards and had been sued for doing so many times before the lawsuit was even made. Even if you expect coffee to be hot, you don't expect to need treatment for third-degree burns on your genitals after spilling a little of it. Even so so, "coffee is supposed to be hot" remains the mockery of this, as featured in ''{{Series/Seinfeld}}'', though Kramer's retort on the same show would be valid: "Not ''that'' hot".



* When an argument or counterargument is presented with some ridicule thrown in for good measure. The validity of the argument is independent of how courteously (or not) it was delivered. For example, Bob says, "I could be a professional basketball player." Alice says, "You? Don't make me laugh. You're a lazy, overweight slob who doesn't exercise and has no discipline for taking care of your body. You're much too old, less than five feet tall, clumsy, and blind as a bat. You're too arrogant to listen to coaches and too lazy to practice. And I don't think you've done anything athletic in your life." If Alice is telling the truth, her arguments for why Bob could not be a professional basketball player are valid, even if she is ridiculing him.

to:

* When an argument or counterargument is presented with some ridicule thrown in for good measure. The validity of the argument is independent of how courteously (or not) it was delivered. For example, Bob says, says: "I could be a professional basketball player." Alice says, says: "You? Don't make me laugh. You're a lazy, overweight slob who doesn't exercise and has no discipline for taking care of your body. You're much too old, less than five feet tall, clumsy, and blind as a bat. You're too arrogant to listen to coaches and too lazy to practice. And I don't think you've done anything athletic in your life." If Alice is telling the truth, her arguments for why Bob could not be a professional basketball player are valid, even if she is ridiculing him.


--> "Queen Alice is using what some may call a [[CoolAndUnusualPunishment cruel and unusual tool]] to break the resistance of rebel prisoners. I bet many parents would agree! Some are being forced to listen to ''Series/BarneyAndFriends'' sing the "I Love You" song. I think after an hour of that they’ll spill the beans, don’t you?"

[[TheWarOnTerror The way it's been employed by US forces involved in anti-partisan campaigns]] is to lock the victim in a completely dark room and play it [[LoudOfWar as loudly as possible]] below the point at which they will lose their hearing over time. The darkness is often spiced up with non-stop blinding flashes of light at (ir)regular intervals. The use of 'quiet rooms' (like the ones used in recording studios) is interesting, as (ir)regular bursts of not-quite-deafening music can be contrasted with deafening silence[[note]] Much more effective than it sounds - non-deaf people suffer auditory hallucinations and can even be physically ill after just an hour of near-total quiet[[/note]]. It's done until they inevitably have a mental breakdown or, eventually, go insane. While the wording of the example above suggested just an hour, in practice months or even years aren't unheard of. In summation it's just as if not more painful than regular torture, removes the need for dedicated Torture Technicians, and leaves no trace on the victims so you can more easily deny having tortured them if anyone asks.

As this example illustrates, stating something in a way that makes it seem silly and/or trivial does not necessarily mean it ''is (just/only)'' silly and/or trivial.

to:

--> "Queen Alice is using what some may call a [[CoolAndUnusualPunishment cruel and unusual tool]] -->"According to break the resistance of rebel prisoners. I bet many parents would agree! Some are being forced to listen to ''Series/BarneyAndFriends'' sing the "I Love You" song. I think after quantum theory, an hour of that they’ll spill the beans, don’t you?"

[[TheWarOnTerror The way it's been employed by US forces involved in anti-partisan campaigns]] is to lock the victim in a completely dark room and play it [[LoudOfWar as loudly as possible]] below the point at which they will lose their hearing over time. The darkness is often spiced up with non-stop blinding flashes of light at (ir)regular intervals. The use of 'quiet rooms' (like the ones used in recording studios) is interesting, as (ir)regular bursts of not-quite-deafening music
electron can be contrasted with deafening silence[[note]] Much more effective than it sounds - non-deaf people suffer auditory hallucinations and can even be physically ill after just an hour of near-total quiet[[/note]]. It's done until they inevitably have a mental breakdown or, eventually, go insane. While the wording of the example above suggested just an hour, in practice months or even years aren't unheard of. In summation it's just as if not more painful than regular torture, removes the need for dedicated Torture Technicians, and leaves no trace on the victims so two places at once! Have you can more easily deny having tortured them if anyone asks.

As this example illustrates, stating something in a way that makes it seem silly and/or trivial does not necessarily mean it ''is (just/only)'' silly and/or trivial.
ever heard anything so stupid? It must be wrong!"



* Some would argue the use of pejorative nicknames for {{God}} or the very concept of a deity such as the Magic Sky Pixie qualifies as it is used by many to disprove God not by presenting evidence, but by rephrasing it in a way that sounds ridiculous. However, aesthetically similar arguments have been used as legitimate ''reductio ad absurdum'' on the principle "[X argument] for the existence of God works equally well for the existence of magic pixies[[labelnote:*]](or The UsefulNotes/FlyingSpaghettiMonster, Invisible Pink Unicorn, Orbiting Teapot, take your pick)[[/labelnote]], so if I accept one I must equally accept the other." The problem arises when someone skips that argument and goes straight to using the pejorative nickname. Furthermore, as has been noted by many a nonbeliever (whether self-identified as atheist or not), the arguments for the existence of a creator deity work just as well for one religion's idea of God as any other's--or, for that matter, a God no one has thought of yet. It says nothing about this deity's personality, concern for humanity, ability or desire to reward good behavior and punish sin, or even why there should be one god and not two or five or ten or twenty.


* Quoting an opposing argument or slogan sarcastically. Saying "Won't somebody think of the children!" sarcastically is often effective in shutting down any argument over whether something might in fact be harmful to children.

to:

* Quoting an opposing argument or slogan sarcastically. Saying "Won't somebody think {{think of the children!" children}}!" sarcastically is often effective in shutting down any argument over whether something might in fact be harmful to children.


* ''Series/PennAndTellerBullshit'' uses many an AppealToRidicule when they believe the argument of their opposition would be obviously wrong to the audience. Since they used the same arrogant, condescending tone when making actual points, it fit in to the show.

to:

* ''Series/PennAndTellerBullshit'' uses many an AppealToRidicule when they believe the argument of their opposition would be obviously wrong to the audience. Since they used the same arrogant, condescending tone when making actual good points, it fit in to the show.



* 9/11 truthers like to dismiss the official story by describing the hijackers as "some Arabs with box cutters". Because clearly only the white man is smart enough to pull off large-scale terrorist attacks.

to:

* 9/11 truthers like to dismiss the official story by describing the hijackers as "some Arabs with box cutters". Because clearly only the white man is people are smart enough to pull off large-scale terrorist attacks.



* Ray Comfort, otherwise known as "Banana Man" is famous for his man on the street interviews, in which he (often accompanied by sidekick KirkCameron) reduce evolution to a series of scientific impossibilites and absurdities, employing virtually every logical fallacy in the book, notably the appeal to ridicule and its cousin, the straw man fallacy. In addition to this, expecting a layman to have a relatively advanced knowledge of biology is a bit problematic in and of itself; your average pedestrian might not be able to explain why binary code makes a computer work, but that certainly doesn't negate its effectiveness. It's also hard to believe that in all his years of doing this, he has never encountered ANYONE capable of competently explaining natural selection as the driving force behind evolution.
* In ''Series/StarTrekTheNextGeneration'', during the episode "[[Recap/StarTrekTheNextGenerationS4E15FirstContact First Contact]]", William Riker is given a superficial make-over to look like a non-human while reconnoitering a species on the verge of warp contact. In other words, the human is an alien amongst the (native) Malcorians. He is wounded and a medical doctor confronts him about the biological differences and asks Riker point blank if he is an alien. Riker mocks the idea, saying it is more likely he is a weather balloon than an alien. The doctor recognizes the dodge immediately.
* Sometimes, this trope is used to misrepresent a lawsuit as a FrivolousLawsuit. For example, the infamous "Hot Coffee Case" was ''not'' frivolous; people think it was about someone who didn't "know" her coffee would be hot and/or handled it recklessly, when in fact [=McDonald's=] ''was'' serving their coffee hotter than safety standards and had been reprimanded for doing so several times before the lawsuit was even made. Even if you expect coffee to be hot, you don't expect to need treatment for third-degree burns on your genitals after spilling a little of it.

to:

* Ray Comfort, otherwise known as "Banana Man" is famous for his man on the street interviews, in which he (often accompanied by sidekick KirkCameron) Kirk Cameron) reduce evolution to a series of scientific impossibilites impossibilities and absurdities, employing virtually every logical fallacy in the book, notably the appeal to ridicule and its cousin, the straw man fallacy. In addition to this, expecting a layman to have a relatively advanced knowledge of biology is a bit problematic in and of itself; your average pedestrian might not be able to explain why binary code makes a computer work, but that certainly doesn't negate its effectiveness. It's also hard to believe that in all his years of doing this, he has never encountered ANYONE capable of competently explaining natural selection as the driving force behind evolution.
evolution (in fact he has been told evolution really works by biologists, but still rejects their explanations).
* In ''Series/StarTrekTheNextGeneration'', during the episode "[[Recap/StarTrekTheNextGenerationS4E15FirstContact First Contact]]", William Riker is given a superficial make-over to look like a non-human while reconnoitering a species on the verge of warp contact. In other words, the human is an alien amongst among the (native) Malcorians. He is wounded and a medical doctor confronts him about the biological differences and asks Riker point blank if he is an alien. Riker mocks the idea, saying it is more likely he is a weather balloon than an alien. The doctor recognizes the dodge immediately.
* Sometimes, this trope is used to misrepresent a lawsuit as a FrivolousLawsuit. For example, the infamous "Hot Coffee Case" was ''not'' frivolous; people think it was about someone who didn't "know" her coffee would be hot and/or handled it recklessly, when in fact [=McDonald's=] ''was'' serving their coffee hotter than safety standards and had been reprimanded sued for doing so several many times before the lawsuit was even made. Even if you expect coffee to be hot, you don't expect to need treatment for third-degree burns on your genitals after spilling a little of it. Even so "coffee is supposed to be hot" remains the mockery of this, as featured in ''{{Series/Seinfeld}}'', though Kramer's retort on the same show would be valid: "Not ''that'' hot".


--> "Queen Alice is using what some may call a [[CoolAndUnusualPunishment cruel and unusual tool]] to break the resistance of rebel prisoners. I bet many parents would agree! Some are being forced to listen to Series/BarneyAndFriends sing the "I Love You" song. I think after an hour of that they’ll spill the beans, don’t you?"

to:

--> "Queen Alice is using what some may call a [[CoolAndUnusualPunishment cruel and unusual tool]] to break the resistance of rebel prisoners. I bet many parents would agree! Some are being forced to listen to Series/BarneyAndFriends ''Series/BarneyAndFriends'' sing the "I Love You" song. I think after an hour of that they’ll spill the beans, don’t you?"



* Basically the entire point of Radio/TheDebaters, a comedy debate show on Creator/{{CBC}} radio

to:

* Basically the entire point of Radio/TheDebaters, a comedy debate show on Creator/{{CBC}} radioradio.


* Basically the entire point of Radio/TheDebaters, a comedy debate show on {{CBC}} radio

to:

* Basically the entire point of Radio/TheDebaters, a comedy debate show on {{CBC}} Creator/{{CBC}} radio


* The most common version is simply repeating your opponent's claim (or part of it) in a silly voice, or, on the internet, repeating it in block capitals with extra leetspeak ([[GrammarNazi teh horrible grammar is optional]]).

to:

* The most common version is simply repeating your opponent's claim (or part of it) in a silly voice, or, on the internet, repeating it in block capitals with extra leetspeak ([[GrammarNazi teh horrible grammar is optional]]).optional]]) or adding "herp derp" at the end of the sentence.

Added DiffLines:

* Ray Comfort, otherwise known as "Banana Man" is famous for his man on the street interviews, in which he (often accompanied by sidekick KirkCameron) reduce evolution to a series of scientific impossibilites and absurdities, employing virtually every logical fallacy in the book, notably the appeal to ridicule and its cousin, the straw man fallacy. In addition to this, expecting a layman to have a relatively advanced knowledge of biology is a bit problematic in and of itself; your average pedestrian might not be able to explain why binary code makes a computer work, but that certainly doesn't negate its effectiveness. It's also hard to believe that in all his years of doing this, he has never encountered ANYONE capable of competently explaining natural selection as the driving force behind evolution.


* Some would argue the use of pejorative nicknames for {{God}} or the very concept of a deity such as the Magic Sky Pixie qualifies as it is used by many to disprove God not by presenting evidence, but by rephrasing it in a way that sounds ridiculous. However, aesthetically similar arguments have been used as legitimate ''reductio ad absurdum'' on the principle "[X argument] for the existence of God works equally well for the existence of magic pixies[[labelnote:*]](or The UsefulNotes/FlyingSpaghettiMonster, Invisible Pink Unicorn, Orbiting Teapot, take your pick)[[/labelnote]], so if I accept one I must equally accept the other." The problem arises when someone skips that argument and goes straight to using the pejorative nickname.

to:

* Some would argue the use of pejorative nicknames for {{God}} or the very concept of a deity such as the Magic Sky Pixie qualifies as it is used by many to disprove God not by presenting evidence, but by rephrasing it in a way that sounds ridiculous. However, aesthetically similar arguments have been used as legitimate ''reductio ad absurdum'' on the principle "[X argument] for the existence of God works equally well for the existence of magic pixies[[labelnote:*]](or The UsefulNotes/FlyingSpaghettiMonster, Invisible Pink Unicorn, Orbiting Teapot, take your pick)[[/labelnote]], so if I accept one I must equally accept the other." The problem arises when someone skips that argument and goes straight to using the pejorative nickname. Furthermore, as has been noted by many a nonbeliever (whether self-identified as atheist or not), the arguments for the existence of a creator deity work just as well for one religion's idea of God as any other's--or, for that matter, a God no one has thought of yet. It says nothing about this deity's personality, concern for humanity, ability or desire to reward good behavior and punish sin, or even why there should be one god and not two or five or ten or twenty.


* In ''Series/StarTrekTheNextGeneration'', during the episode "First Contact", William Riker is given a superficial make-over to look like a non-human while reconnoitering a species on the verge of warp contact. In other words, the human is an alien amongst the (native) Malcorians. He is wounded and a medical doctor confronts him about the biological differences and asks Riker point blank if he is an alien. Riker mocks the idea, saying it is more likely he is a weather balloon than an alien. The doctor recognizes the dodge immediately.

to:

* In ''Series/StarTrekTheNextGeneration'', during the episode "First Contact", "[[Recap/StarTrekTheNextGenerationS4E15FirstContact First Contact]]", William Riker is given a superficial make-over to look like a non-human while reconnoitering a species on the verge of warp contact. In other words, the human is an alien amongst the (native) Malcorians. He is wounded and a medical doctor confronts him about the biological differences and asks Riker point blank if he is an alien. Riker mocks the idea, saying it is more likely he is a weather balloon than an alien. The doctor recognizes the dodge immediately.


* In StarTrekTheNextGeneration, during the episode First Contact, William Riker is given a superficial make-over to look like an non-human while reconnoitering a species on the verge of warp contact. In other words, the human is an alien amongst the (native) arkonians. He is wounded and a medical doctor confronts him about the biological differences and asks Riker point blank if he is an alien. Riker mocks the idea, saying it is more likely he is a weather balloon than an alien. The doctor recognizes the dodge immediately.

to:

* In StarTrekTheNextGeneration, ''Series/StarTrekTheNextGeneration'', during the episode First Contact, "First Contact", William Riker is given a superficial make-over to look like an a non-human while reconnoitering a species on the verge of warp contact. In other words, the human is an alien amongst the (native) arkonians.Malcorians. He is wounded and a medical doctor confronts him about the biological differences and asks Riker point blank if he is an alien. Riker mocks the idea, saying it is more likely he is a weather balloon than an alien. The doctor recognizes the dodge immediately.

Showing 15 edit(s) of 56

Top

Example of:

/

Feedback