Your claim is almost true if, by “logical argument”, you mean specifically a deductive argument, and you expand “ad hominem” into “irrelevant”. Bust most real-

Your claim is almost true if, by “logical argument”, you mean specifically a deductive argument, and you expand “ad hominem” into “irrelevant”. Bust most real-world news stories and other interesting claims of material fact (and even moreso, claims of things being good or bad) are not syllogisms where the major and minor premise are trivially verifiable and the conclusion either follows of logical necessity or not, but are, to the extent they can be framed as arguments, inductive arguments. You are also wrong about what ad hominem is (there are plenty of counterarguments to a logical argument that are neither on point not ad honinem), but the bigger issue is that the subject here is mot a logical argument in th sense that would make your claim correct insofar as rejecting all counterarguments that do not falsify the argument by logical necessity.