Argumentum ad invidiam

Argumentum ad invidiam appeals to envy to cloud the audience’s judgment. Instead of evaluating a claim by evidence, it pushes rejection because others “have too much” or “do not deserve it”.

Example

“We should not fund that project: people there already earn more than everyone else.”
(The project’s impact is not evaluated.)

Applied example (political)

“Do not believe that report: it comes from elitist universities.” (Origin does not invalidate content.)

Applied example (mystical)

“That teacher has too many followers; it must be pure ego.” (Success does not refute evidence.)

Why it is fallacious

• It replaces analysis with resentment.
• It treats perceived unfairness as proof of falsity.
• It avoids discussing verifiable data.

How to spot it

• Emotional comparisons: “they have”, “they enjoy”.
• Moral judgment without factual evaluation.
• No evidence about outcomes.

How to respond

• Ask for measurable effects and evidence.
• Separate envy from the actual merit of the proposal.
• Reframe the discussion around impact and data.