Two wrongs make a right
 |
This article may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. (Consider using more specific cleanup instructions.) Please help improve this article if you can. The talk page may contain suggestions. (April 2011) |
 |
Look up two wrongs don't make a right in Wiktionary, the free dictionary. |
Two wrongs do not make one right is a fairly common saying in English language and in countries such as India[1]. Two wrongs make a right is an English phrases and a logical fallacy that occurs when it is assumed that if one wrong is committed, another wrong will cancel it out.
- Speaker A: You shouldn't embezzle from your employer. It's against the law.
- Speaker B: My employer cheats on their taxes. That's against the law, too!
The unstated premise is that breaking the law (the wrong) is justified, as long as the other party also does so. It is often used as a red herring, or an attempt to change or distract from the issue. For example:
- Speaker A: President Williams lied in his testimony to Congress. He should not do that.
- Speaker B: But you are ignoring the fact that President Roberts lied in his Congressional testimony!
Even if President Roberts lied in his Congressional testimony, that does not make it acceptable for President Williams to do so as well. (At best, it means Williams is no worse than Roberts.) By invoking the fallacy, the contested issue of "lying" is ignored.
The tu quoque fallacy is a specific type of "two wrongs make a right". Accusing another person of not practicing what they preach, while appropriate in some situations, does not in itself invalidate an action or statement that is perceived as contradictory.
Contents |
[edit] Two wrongs don't make a right
Two wrongs don't make a right is the proverb that contradicts this logical fallacy. It means that a wrongful action is not a morally appropriate way to correct or cancel a previous wrongful action.[2]
[edit] Criticism
Common use of the term, in the realm of business ethics, has been criticized by scholar Gregory S. Kavka writing in the Journal of Business Ethics. Kavka refers back to philosophical concepts of retribution by Thomas Hobbes. He states that if something supposedly held up as a moral standard or common social rule is violated enough in society, then an individual or group within society can break that standard or rule as well since this keeps them from being unfairly disadvantaged. As well, in specific circumstances violations of social rules can be defensible if done as direct responses to other violations. For example, Kavka states that it is wrong to deprive someone of their property but it is right to take property back from a criminal who takes other's property in the first place. He also states that one should be careful not to use this ambiguity as an excuse to recklessly violate ethical rules.[3]
Conservative journalist Victor Lasky wrote in his book It Didn't Start With Watergate that while "two wrongs don't make a right", if a set of immoral things are done and left un-prosecuted, this creates a legal precedent. Thus, people who do the same wrongs in the future should rationally expect to get away as well. Lasky analogizes the situation between John F. Kennedy's wiretapping of Martin Luther King, Jr. (which lead to nothing) and Richard Nixon's actions in Watergate (which Nixon thought would also lead to nothing).[4]
[edit] history
Idea that a double wrong might infer/make a right was yet published in a poem as soon as 1734[5].
[edit] See also
[edit] References
- ^ http://www.sportal.co.in/cricket-news-display/team-indias-needless-cover-up-163058
- ^ http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/two_wrongs_don%27t_make_a_right
- ^ Kavka, G. S. (1983). "When two ?wrongs? Make a right: an essay on business ethics". Journal of Business Ethics 2: 61–66. doi:10.1007/BF00382714.
- ^ It Didn't Start With Watergate. Victor Lasky.
- ^ C. Ackers for J. Wilford, ed. (1734). "The London magazine, or, Gentleman's monthly intelligencer, Volume 3". {{ An orient star led thro' his blind- / Side, to a prize bis eye of mind: / The lightning said, its he; in sphbt / Of fate two wrongs infer one right. / let fly; well shot thanks to my sparks; / A blind boy once has cleft the mark. / |The Moral (translated - origine ? - in Hudibrastic)}} [[1]]
