Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
81 bytes added ,  21:17, December 15, 2011
m
Expanding the section title a little more to "Ad Hominem Arguments Are Not Always Fallacious" for explanation
Line 1: Line 1:  +
#REDIRECT [[New Atheism leadership's problem with excess weight]]
 +
 
An ''argumentum '''ad hominem''''' ([[Latin]]: "argument against the man"), is a [[logical fallacy]] consisting of denigrating one's opponent or otherwise introducing irrelevant premises about one's opponent, instead of dealing with the flaws in the form and function of the opponent's argument. Note that the statement made in an ''ad hominem'' argument does not have to be false for this type of fallacy to have been committed; it just has to be irrelevant to the topic of the debate.
 
An ''argumentum '''ad hominem''''' ([[Latin]]: "argument against the man"), is a [[logical fallacy]] consisting of denigrating one's opponent or otherwise introducing irrelevant premises about one's opponent, instead of dealing with the flaws in the form and function of the opponent's argument. Note that the statement made in an ''ad hominem'' argument does not have to be false for this type of fallacy to have been committed; it just has to be irrelevant to the topic of the debate.
   Line 26: Line 28:  
might be considered an ad hominem attack on Wagner's music.  It is true, and in some contexts might be a relevant comment.  But if someone says it in order to suggest that Wagner was a bad composer, then it's an ad hominem attack, because whether some bad people liked his music is not a relevant comment on the quality of his music.
 
might be considered an ad hominem attack on Wagner's music.  It is true, and in some contexts might be a relevant comment.  But if someone says it in order to suggest that Wagner was a bad composer, then it's an ad hominem attack, because whether some bad people liked his music is not a relevant comment on the quality of his music.
   −
== Ad Hominem Not Always Fallacious ==
+
== Ad Hominem Arguments Are Not Always Fallacious ==
 
* The ad hominem attack is usually fallacious, and becomes reasonable ''only'' when the consideration being advanced is directly relevant to whether the other person is generally truthful or reliable, or whether he is telling the truth in this instance, or whether he is engaged in a logical fallacy of his own. The usual case occurs when the other person is engaging in [[special pleading]].<ref name=Lander/> Exposure of special pleading is a valid counterargument--so long as the accusation itself is valid. Technically, this is ''not'' an example of ''ad hominem'', because it is an attack on the specific argument and/or the evidence advanced to support it.
 
* The ad hominem attack is usually fallacious, and becomes reasonable ''only'' when the consideration being advanced is directly relevant to whether the other person is generally truthful or reliable, or whether he is telling the truth in this instance, or whether he is engaged in a logical fallacy of his own. The usual case occurs when the other person is engaging in [[special pleading]].<ref name=Lander/> Exposure of special pleading is a valid counterargument--so long as the accusation itself is valid. Technically, this is ''not'' an example of ''ad hominem'', because it is an attack on the specific argument and/or the evidence advanced to support it.
  
6

edits

Navigation menu