4 ms·
Criticism of a writer is only argumentum ad hominem if that criticism is an attempt to invalidate the the writer's statement by means of questioning his authori
by cheald 13y ago
Criticism of a writer is only argumentum ad hominem if that criticism is an attempt to invalidate the the writer's statement by means of questioning his authority, which is certainly not what the OP was doing. Discussing the author's qualities outside of a debate of of the article's thesis is totally in-bounds.
- saraid216 13y ago> by means of questioning his authority Not authority; credibility. It's a nitpick, but the distinction is important when we're discussing government agents. Credibility is essentially rhetorical authority ("I am willing to take your word because I consider you an expert in the relevant domain"), rather than the kind of authority derived from official bestowment of power.
- graeme 13y agoAuthority is also the right word: Authority: 3. • a person with extensive or specialized knowledge about a subject; an expert: she was an authority on the stock market. From the Oxford American Dictionary It's this meaning of the word authority used in Appeal to Authority: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority
- saraid216 13y agoRight. That's what rhetorical authority is. But we're talking about this guy named Stewart Baker, who just so happens to have authority as a senior officer of the executive branch of the United States Government. This is also a type of authority. It is not the relevant type of authority when discussing whether or not a statement is an ad hominem.
- cheald 13y agoYou're right - that's a much better word. I think the sentiment remains the same though.