PREFACE - THE JEALOUS-FALLACY IN ITS MANY FORMS
Alright, I have already dissected one very common fallacy invoked sa pamamagitan ng some Twilight fans and a few Harry Potter fans as well, the Edward-fallacy. I shall not discuss that one but instead I will be moving on and examine another common fallacy invoked sa pamamagitan ng some fans, using what I believe is the two most common forms of it.
"YOU ARE JUST JEALOUS, THEREFORE YOUR ARGUMENT IS INVALID"
Firstly, let us examine the logical reasoning behind "You are just jealous, therefore your argument is invalid".
It is invoked when any tagahanga post an argument and employes this one as rearguard to fend off counter arguments; or it is used as an counter argument alone. In essence, sa pamamagitan ng their logic, invoking jealousy immediately dismisses the opponents argument as defeated, and not worthy of any further discussion.
Now, this type of argument is one of the most atrocious fallacies in existence. Instead of counter-arguing against the opponents arguments, it dismisses them sa pamamagitan ng attacking the merit of the person who put the original argument forward. The formal name is Argumentum ad hominem (argument to the person - personal attack fallacy), and in my opinion it is one of the vilest fallacies one can commit.
sa pamamagitan ng insulting/attacking the opponent in a debate, one immediately loses several vital things, like respect. Further, insulting one's opponent has not moved the pagtatalo pasulong as the original arguments remain untouched, and therefore stands until a proper counter-argument takes them down.
In conclusion, calling one's opponent jealous is not helpful at all for one's cause. It firstly removes one's respectfullness; secondly it allows an opponents arguments to stay in place, which is basically handing one's opponents the victory. Now isn't that extremely beneficial for one's cause? Innit?
"YOU ARE JUST JEALOUS OF ME, THEREFORE MY SERIES IS BETTER"
Secondly, we shall examine the above quote. We pose one important question: Why is this argument false?
Firstly, let us see if there are any connection between these two statements: A persons jealousy and a book series' quality. Then I shall prove to you that jealousy is dependant of quality and not the other way around.
The level of jealousy of any person is most often a most personal feeling. It comes when any other person around us possesses something we do not possess, while this something is a thing we desire to have. Then we are jealous.
The quality of any book series of anything is dependent of several things. The grammatical correctness of the prose and therefore the ability to easily navigate the text, the level of interest they raise in us, the difficulty of the words in the prose, the moral message they present, et cetera. Whereas jealousy only touches the quality of a book series if and only if it is already possessing good quality, for who would even be interested in a book for starters if it is riddled with misspellings, faulty sentence order and promotes values we despise? Let alone desire to possess it?
Thus, jealousy is dependent on the quality of a book series, since it appears after the establishment of sinabi quality. Therefore stating that quality is dependent on jealousy is inherently contradictory to the above proven hypothesis. So sa pamamagitan ng stating the segundo hypothesis, one is obliged to prove it in its own term to defeat the contradiction.
As of yet, no one has presented me with convincing evidence that quality is dependent of jealousy. Since I compiled proof of my hypothesis (that jealousy is dependent of quality), I hazard to say that it stands.
Therefore, jealousy depends on quality, not the other way around. Quod Erat Demostrandum - Which was to be proven.
To call one's opponents jealous while not counter-arguing sinabi opponents arguments hands sinabi opponents the victory sa pamamagitan ng fiat, while being simultaneously fallacious and unworthy of respect. While arguing that "You're jealous of my book series, therefore my book series has quality" is at least a very false argument.