Anne: “I oppose X”
George: “You only oppose X because you are a Y”
A: “No, I oppose X because of reasons A, B, and C.”
G: “You only think A, B, and C because you are a Y.”
A: “No, I really think A, B, and C are true.”
G: “You wouldn’t oppose X if you were a Z”
A: “Maybe, but A, B, and C would still be true if I was a Z and so I ought to oppose X even if I didn’t”
G: “But if you were a Z how would you know about A, B, and C?”
A: “Someone would have to tell me about A, B, and C. This is what I am trying to tell you now.”
G: “But I am a Z. Therefore, I support X.”
A: “But being a Z isn’t a good reason to support X”
G: “But all the Z’s I know support X. If I didn’t support X, the Z’s would be annoyed.”
A: “Well, you have choice to make don’t you?”
G: “Well, you would say that. You’re a Y.”
…and on it goes…
The genetic fallacy commits the error of irrelevance by denying or supporting a claim by appealing to the personal history of the proponent or source of the claim.
