I think hypocrisy can invalidate some arguments. For example, apoliticists often argue for a policy of apolticism in various spaces. If even they can’t follow their suggested policy, how is anyone else supposed to? I would say in that case, hypocrisy invalidates their argument.
It would depend on the exact argument being made. I would say that generally hypocrisy does not invalidate the point being made, but there are a handful of exceptions wherein the argument is in some way related to personal character.
Otherwise, the point is ironic (and thus humorous insofar as it points out the flaw of its proponent), but not invalid.
I guess the deciding difference would be whether the hypocrisy is oxymoronic - whether the act of making the argument undermines its own position. All oxymoronic arguments are hypocritical, but not all hypocrites are oxymorons.
I think hypocrisy can invalidate some arguments. For example, apoliticists often argue for a policy of apolticism in various spaces. If even they can’t follow their suggested policy, how is anyone else supposed to? I would say in that case, hypocrisy invalidates their argument.
It would depend on the exact argument being made. I would say that generally hypocrisy does not invalidate the point being made, but there are a handful of exceptions wherein the argument is in some way related to personal character.
Otherwise, the point is ironic (and thus humorous insofar as it points out the flaw of its proponent), but not invalid.
I guess the deciding difference would be whether the hypocrisy is oxymoronic - whether the act of making the argument undermines its own position. All oxymoronic arguments are hypocritical, but not all hypocrites are oxymorons.