Fallacy?

Genetic fallacy

An argument is judged by who makes it, or where it comes from, rather than by its merits.

Also called: Ad hominem · Poisoning the well

The test

Would the argument be judged the same way if someone else had made it?

Arguments do not inherit their truth or falsehood from the people who make them. A believer can make a good scientific argument and an atheist a bad one, and the other way round.

This site has a stated Christian stance, and readers are entitled to know it. But the claim cards ask to be judged on their evidence and reasoning, and they try to extend the same courtesy to every source they cite.

Seen on both sides

In mainstream arguments
It would commit the genetic fallacy to dismiss an argument as “religion dressed up as science” rather than answering it.
In critical arguments
It would commit the genetic fallacy to argue that because Darwin's ideas were used to justify eugenics, they must be false.
Not a fallacy when

The source matters to how far we can trust testimony that cannot be checked. It never settles evidence that anyone can check.

Diagnosed on this site

Not yet diagnosed in any pillar or claim card.

Further reading

  1. Copi IM, Cohen C, McMahon K. Introduction to Logic. Pearson, 14th ed. (2011).