Argumentation Schemes and Historical Origins of the Circumstantial Ad Hominem Argument

Argumentation 18 (3):359-368 (2004)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

There are two views of the ad hominem argument found in the textbooks and other traditional treatments of this argument, the Lockean or ex concessis view and the view of ad hominem as personal attack. This article addresses problems posed by this ambiguity. In particular, it discusses the problem of whether Aristotle's description of the ex concessis type of argument should count as evidence that he had identified the circumstantial ad hominem argument. Argumentation schemes are used as the basis for drawing a distinction between this latter form of argument and another called argument from commitment, corresponding to the ex concessis argument

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 76,140

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Ad Hominem Fallacies, Bias, and Testimony.Audrey Yap - 2013 - Argumentation 27 (2):97-109.
Argumentation Schemes.Douglas Walton, Chris Reed & Fabrizio Macagno - 2008 - Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-08-24

Downloads
115 (#109,926)

6 months
2 (#297,033)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?