“ newfreep didn’t reference the authors; they criticized the quality/reputation of the website (i.e., dismissively writing ‘tech blog’). I replied that the website belongs to the National Institute of Health.”
It is called a Genetic Fallacy.
One commits the GnF when advocating for a conclusion based solely on origin. This is a fallacy of relevance—irrelevance, really—because the origin of a claim may be irrelevant to its truth-value. That is to say, providing an account of the genesis of a claim, its history or origin, may be informative and helpful; however, it need not determine the truth-value of the claim. Therefore, when one draws a conclusion regarding the truth-value of a claim based solely on the origin of the claim, then one may have committed the GnF.
“ newfreep didn’t reference the authors; they criticized the quality/reputation of the website (i.e., dismissively writing ‘tech blog’). I replied that the website belongs to the National Institute of Health.”
It is called a Genetic Fallacy.
One commits the GnF when advocating for a conclusion based solely on origin. This is a fallacy of relevance—irrelevance, really—because the origin of a claim may be irrelevant to its truth-value. That is to say, providing an account of the genesis of a claim, its history or origin, may be informative and helpful; however, it need not determine the truth-value of the claim. Therefore, when one draws a conclusion regarding the truth-value of a claim based solely on the origin of the claim, then one may have committed the GnF.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Thank you! It’s how the trolls make their living, but I hadn’t seen a nice concise explanation of why I roll my eyes when they do this particular dance.
In my prior industry, the NIH’s Pub Med (PMC) is considered reputable; lawyers will not bother challenging research vetted by the NIH and published in Pub Med. All other research outside Pub Med is likely to be challenged in court.
But on FR, trolls shriek, “LOL!!!! ‘Pub Med just publishes it! It doesn’t mean anything!’
They make it sound like the NIH doesn’t even read it, or has some need to publish anything sent to it. Pub Med vetts content before publishing it.