4 ms·
Nope. He argued that the judge was wrong, and then suggested that it was the judge's age that caused him to make an error. What he didn't do is to use the jud
by starwed 15y ago
Nope. He argued that the judge was wrong, and then suggested that it was the judge's age that caused him to make an error.
What he didn't do is to use the judge's age in support of the first argument -- that would have been ad hominem.
http://plover.net/~bonds/adhominem.html http://plover.net/~bonds/adhominem.html
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- catshirt 15y agohe did: "[suggest] that it was the judge's age that caused him to make an error" he didnt: "[use] the judge's age in support of the first argument" forgive me; perhaps you could clarify the difference?
- Dylan16807 15y agoIt was a side note and not part of the argument.
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- jcc80 15y agoIs this a first year philosophy class? Reminds me of kids in law school. Ad hom this, straw man that...pointless discussion. We can all go look up the definitions if we want & decide for ourselves. Let it go & discussion the actual issue. Fact is having a second means to communicate (a .me or whatever address) doesn't mean speech isn't an issue here. http://www.thedomains.com/2011/08/05/federal-court-rules-domain-seizures-do-not-violate-free-speech-loss-of-domain-is-not-a-substantial-hardship/ http://www.thedomains.com/2011/08/05/federal-court-rules-dom...
- starwed 15y agoIt is the difference between > My opponent is an idiot and believes X to be true, therefore X is false. (ad hominem) and > X is false. My opponent believes X to be true, therefore they are an idiot. (Not ad hominem.)