It's All Very Well for You to Talk! Situationally Disqualifying Ad Hominem Attacks

Authors

  • Erik C. W. Krabbe University of Groningen
  • Douglas Walton

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.22329/il.v15i2.2475

Keywords:

Fallacies, argumentation, ad hominem arguments, personal attack, bias, poisoning the well argument, character attack, pragmatic inconsistency

Abstract

The situationally disqualifying ad hominem attack is an argumentative move in critical dialogue whereby one participant points out certain features in his adversary's personal situation that are claimed to make it inappropriate for this adversary to take a particular point of view, to argue in a particular way, or to launch certain criticisms. In this paper, we discuss some examples of this way of arguing. Other types of ad hominem argumentation are discussed as well and compared with the situationally disqualifying type. The socalled Houtlosser Dilemma highlights the danger of unconditionally condoning ad hominem arguments. We propose a classification of ad hominem, and a more restrictive use of the term 'circumstantial'. Finally, we discuss whether ad hominem arguments are (always?) to be rejected as fallacious.

Downloads

Published

1993-01-01

Issue

Vol. 15 No. 2 (1993)

Section

Articles

License

Copyright for each article published in Informal Logic belongs to its author(s). Informal Logic has the right of first publication. Permission to reprint any article that appears in Informal Logic MUST be obtained in writing from the author(s). In addition to any form of acknowledgement required by the author(s), the following notice must be added to the statement of copyright permission made in the reprint (with the appropriate numbers replacing the ellipses): [Article Title] was originally published in Informal Logic, [year], Volume ..., Number ..., pp. ...-... .