No, not really,  and I acknowledge that my post was a bit off of what you and Greg were discussing, but I was attempting to be humorous, while at the same time, trying to encourage folks like you and other Crackpots, Moonbats and "Anarcho-Capitalists"  to stay away from the voting booth, until such time as you read, study, and can make an informed decision.


You STILL do not get it.  How unfortunate.


 
Leave the Justin Raimondo's,  Chaz Pershings, and "Moonbats Against The War"  web sites alone.  They are no different than the DailyKos, or on the other side, Alex Jones.   All are misinformation sites.

<shakes head>

Philosophy 103: Introduction to Logic
Argumentum Ad Hominem

Abstract: The argument concerning the attack of a person's character or circumstances  is characterized and shown to be sometimes persuasive but normally fallacious.
 
Argumentum ad Hominem (abusive and circumstantial): the fallacy of attacking the character or circumstances of an individual who is advancing a statement or an argument instead of trying to disprove the truth of the statement or the soundness of the argument. Often the argument is characterized simply as a personal attack.

The personal attack is also often termed an "ad personem argument": the statement or argument at issue is dropped from consideration or is ignored, and the locutor's character or circumstances are used to influence opinion.
The fallacy draws its appeal from the technique of "getting personal." The assumption is that what the locutor is saying is entirely or partially dictated by his character or special circumstances and so should be disregarded.
The "tu quoque" or charging the locutor with "being just like the person" the locutor speaking about, is a narrower variety of this fallacy. In other words, rather than trying to disprove a remark about someone's character or circumstances, one accuses the locutor of having the same character or circumstances.

In cross examination or in debate, the point is often expressed as "My point might be bad, but yours is worse."
If the subject includes an assessment of behavior, the point can be put "So I do x [some specific action], but you do too."

Since the circumstantial variety of the ad hominem can be regarded as a special case of the abusive, the distinction between the abusive and the circumstantial is often ignored.
Informal Structure of  ad Hominem
Person L says argument A.
Person L's circumstance or character is not satisfactory.
Argument A is not a good argument.
Examples of the ad hominem:

A prosecutor asks the judge to not admit the testimony of a burglar because burglars are not trustworthy.

  • Francis Bacon's philosophy should be dismissed since Bacon was removed from his chancellorship for dishonesty.

  • Prof. Smith says to Prof. White, "You are much too hard on your students," and Prof. White replies, "But certainly you are not the one to say so. Just last week I heard several of your students complaining."

  • I can't see that we should listen to Governor Smith's proposal to increase the sales tax on automobiles. He has spent the last twenty years in state government and is hardly an unbiased source.

  • Uses of ad hominem considerations:

    When examining literary or philosophical works, looking at the author's character or circumstancescan sometimes provide insight into that person's ideas. In other words, ad hominem considerations can show motives and can sometimes provide explanation. However, these considerations do not demonstrate the truth or falsity of the ideas.
    The character of a person is often relevant in consideration of the sincerity of views being offered and so is often relevant to pragmatic decision-making.

    Self-reference and ad hominem:

    If a philosopher presents a "naturalistic view of knowledge," arguing that all knowledge is a function of the adjustment of an organism to its environment and at the same time pleads that his own knowledge is an exception to this generalization, then the ad hominem fallacy would occur.
    If William James were to claim that all philosophers were either tender-minded or tough-minded except for him with respect to his own variety of pragmatism, then an ad hominem appeal should not be ruled inadmissible against James..


  • Regard$,
    --MJ

    Preventive war was an invention of Hitler. Frankly, I would not even listen to anyone seriously that came and talked about such a thing. -- Dwight Eisenhower

    --
    Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
    For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
     
    * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
    * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
    * Read the latest breaking news, and more.

    Reply via email to