Relevance reviewed: The case of argumentum ad hominem [Book Review]
Argumentation 6 (2):141-159 (1992)
AbstractThis article aims tt providing some conceptual tools for dealing adequately with relevance in argumentative discourse. For this purpose, argumentative relevance is defined as a functional interactional relation between certain elements in the discourse. In addition to the distinction between interpretive and evaluative relevance that can be traced in the literature, analytic relevance is introduced as an intermediary concept. In order to classify the various problems of relevance arising in interpreting, analyzing and evaluating argumentative discourse, a taxonomy is proposed in which the concept of relevance is differentiated along three co-ordinate dimensions: object, domain and aspect. With the help of this taxonomy, it can be shown that the problems of evaluative relevance with which the standard approach to fallacies cannot satisfactory deal can be more systematically approached within a pragma-dialectical framework. This is demonstrated for the argumentum and hominem, which is erroneously treated as a homogenous type of relevance fallacy in logico-centric analyses, so that cases where this is not justified must be treated as ad hoc exceptions
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
References found in this work
Citations of this work
In Context: Giving Contextualization its Rightful Place in the Study of Argumentation.Frans H. van Eemeren - 2011 - Argumentation 25 (2):141-161.
Groundwork in the Theory of Argumentation: Selected Papers of J. Anthony Blair.John Anthony Blair - 2011 - Dordrecht, Netherland: Springer.
The Significance of Informal Logic for Philosophy.David Hitchcock - 2000 - Informal Logic 20 (2).
Institutional Insights for Analysing Strategic Manoeuvring in the British Prime Minister’s Question Time.Dima Mohammed - 2008 - Argumentation 22 (3):377-393.
Similar books and articles
Introduction to 'Philosophy and Argumentum Ad Hominem'.Douglas Walton - 1993 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 12 (3-4):24-24.
Locke and Whately on the Argumentum Ad Hominem.Henry W. Johnstone - 1996 - Argumentation 10 (1):89-97.
The Argumentum Ad Hominem and Two Theses About Evolutionary Epistemology: "Godelian" Reflections.James E. Martin & George B. Kleindorfer - 1991 - Metaphilosophy 22 (1-2):63-75.
Henry Johnstone's Anagnorisis: Argumentum Ad Hominem as Tragic Trope of Truth.Tom Heeney - 1995 - Philosophy and Rhetoric 28 (4):388 - 404.
Philosophy and Argumentum Ad Hominem.Henry W. Johnstone - 1952 - Journal of Philosophy 49 (15):489-498.
The Disguised Abusive Ad Hominem Empirically Investigated: Strategic Manoeuvring with Direct Personal Attacks.Frans H. van Eemeren, Bart Garssen & Bert Meuffels - 2012 - Thinking and Reasoning 18 (3):344 - 364.
A Christian for the Christians, a Christian for the Muslims! An Attempt at an Argumentum Ad Hominem.C. Delkeskamp-Hayes - 1998 - Christian Bioethics 4 (3):284-304.
A Case Study in 'Ad Hominem' Arguments: Fichte's "Science of Knowledge".Peter Suber - 1990 - Philosophy and Rhetoric 23 (1):12 - 42.
Complexity, Relevance and Character: Problems with Teaching the Ad Hominem Fallacy.Stephen de Wijze - 2003 - Educational Philosophy and Theory 35 (1):31-56.
Argumentation Schemes and Historical Origins of the Circumstantial Ad Hominem Argument.D. N. Walton - 2004 - Argumentation 18 (3):359-368.
Take My Advice—I Am Not Following It: Ad Hominem Arguments as Legitimate Rebuttals to Appeals to Authority.Moti Mizrahi - 2010 - Informal Logic 30 (4):435-456.
The Case for Ad Hominem Arguments.Lawrence M. Hinman - 1982 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 60 (4):338 – 345.
Case Study of the Use of a Circumstantial Ad Hominem in Political Argumentation.Douglas N. Walton - 2000 - Philosophy and Rhetoric 33 (2):101 - 115.