11
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 30:
Line 30: − − == Ad Hominem Arguments Are Not Always Fallacious == − * [[Conservatives]] understand that the basic moral character of a person is always relevant to an argument. [[Liberals]] and [[Atheists]] are outraged by examination of an individual's character, considering it to be a personal affront, mainly because they are [[moral relativism|moral relativists.]] Conservatives understand how important it is that those debating an issue be [[trustworthy]], otherwise a true debate/discussion cannot happen. An immoral person is of course incapable of making a legitimate, intellectual, argument because they come from [[deceit]], like [[Richard Dawkins]].
no edit summary
* In the modern legal system, most judges allow the prosecutor to attack the credibility of those who testify on the stand; such [[witness impeachment]] can call into question the character, impartiality, honesty, or competence of a witness. Again, however, this is not technically an ''ad hominem'' argument.
* In the modern legal system, most judges allow the prosecutor to attack the credibility of those who testify on the stand; such [[witness impeachment]] can call into question the character, impartiality, honesty, or competence of a witness. Again, however, this is not technically an ''ad hominem'' argument.
==Other meanings of ad hominem==
==Other meanings of ad hominem==