Back in May of 2006, Blogging Tory co-founder Stephen Taylor waxed eloquent on the properties of logic and civil discourse (emphasis added):
I've always been a fan of the logical fallacy. When countering an argument from a political or ideological opponent, things are often made easier when one's debating foe makes a point that has a blatant logical fallacy. Among the easiest to point out are ad hominem, non sequitur and the straw man.
Reductio ad hominem logical fallacies are so easy to pick out that even without an appreciation for logic in debate, one can easily determine that a point made with a loaded personal attack is obviously an argument that is weak. These logical fallacies attack "the man" instead of the point being made.
"Stephen Harper is a bad Prime Minister because he looks like he eats babies" is an obvious ad hominem attack and one that wouldn't receive any positive consideration in any intelletual debate.
In other news, did you know that Michael Moore is fat?
2 comments:
"Stephen Harper is a bad Prime Minister because he looks like he eats babies" is an obvious ad hominem attack and one that wouldn't receive any positive consideration in any intelletual debate.
actually, I wouldn't consider that an ad hominem arguement at all. Saying Steverino is a bad PM because he looks like he eats babies is a valid attack on his ability to govern. If he doesn't appear trustworthy, it lessens the government's credibiltiy and their ability to convince the public to support legislation on say, federal day care policy. Now i I were to say that Stephen Harper's policy on Afghanistan is bad because Steven Harper is an asshole, or that Stephen Taylor's blog sucks because he's ugly and his mother dresses him funny that would be an ad hominem attack
because the negative things I'm saying about the person have no bearing on the point I'm arguing.
Here's another one of my favourite logical fallacies that I'll post here for your consideration:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_fallacy
Post a Comment