I'm looking for a word or term, possibly a logical fallacy, to describe the idea that belonging to a group inherently grants the members of that group credibility in issues pertaining to that group, even when such an assumption isn't necessarily vaild. Examples include:

  • a person claiming expertise in child development or parenting in general purely by virtue of being a parent themselves

  • a person claiming that their practice of a given religion makes them an authority on said religion, simply by virture of that practice.

  • a citizen of a country believing they are automatically more informed about their country than any outsider, regardless of how well or poorly informed said citizen actually is.

Conversely, a medical doctor is self-evidently an expert in medicine, because that expertise is a prerequisite to becoming a medical doctor. This is at least partially the opposite of the "Calling "Cards"" fallacy (dismissing a vaild argument as "playing a(n) adjective card").

  • I strongly suspect this is off-topic. You seem to be pushing a political barrow of some sort rather than asking a coherent question about English language and usage. Feb 2, 2020 at 4:52
  • 1
    @OrbitalAussie Not seeing it. What specifically indicates barrow-pushing to you?
    – Dallium
    Feb 2, 2020 at 5:05

1 Answer 1


Further research has led me to the Identity Fallacy, in which "the validity of one's logic, evidence, experience or arguments depends not on their own strength but rather on whether the one arguing is a member of a given social class, generation, nationality, religious or ethnic group, color, gender or sexual orientation, profession, occupation or subgroup (1)"

(1) Public domain, "Master List of Logical Fallacies," http://utminers.utep.edu/omwilliamson/ENGL1311/fallacies.htm

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.