Appeal to pity

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

An appeal to pity (also called argumentum ad misericordiam or the Galileo argument)[1][2] is a fallacy in which someone tries to win support for an argument or idea by exploiting his or her opponent's feelings of pity or guilt. It is a specific kind of appeal to emotion. The name "Galileo argument" refers to the scientist's suffering as a result of his house arrest by the Inquisition.

Examples[edit]

  • "You must have graded my exam incorrectly. I studied very hard for weeks specifically because I knew my career depended on getting a good grade. If you give me a failing grade I'm ruined!"
  • "Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, look at this miserable man, in a wheelchair, unable to use his legs. Could such a man really be guilty of embezzlement?"
  • "Lord Byron shouldn't win the poetry competition: he doesn't need the prize money."

Analysis[edit]

Recognizing an argument as an appeal to pity does not necessarily invalidate the conclusion or the factual assertions. There may be other reasons to accept the invited conclusion, but an appeal to pity is not one of them, changingminds and portfolio said (see also Argument from fallacy).Normand Baillargeon says, on the other hand, that appeal to pity is not always illigitimate, and that it is that when the ask is irrational.3.

See also[edit]

Notes[edit]

  1. ^ [1]
  2. ^ "Appeal to Pity (the Galileo Argument)". Retrieved 6 October 2012. 

3. Normand Baillargeon, petit cours d'auto-défense intellectuelle, canada (in french language)