Ad hominem arguments and intelligent design: Reply to Koperski
Zygon 47 (2):289-297 (2012)
Abstract
Abstract Jeffrey Koperski claims in Zygon (2008) that critics of Intelligent Design engage in fallacious ad hominem attacks on ID proponents and that this is a “bad way” to engage them. I show that Koperski has made several errors in his evaluation of the ID critics. He does not distinguish legitimate, relevant ad hominem arguments from fallacious ad hominem attacks. He conflates (or equates) the logical use of valid with the colloquial use of valid. Moreover, Koperski doesn't take seriously the legitimate concerns of the ID critics, and in doing so, commits the straw man fallacy. In the end, I show that no one disagrees with the criticism of improper use of fallacies as methods of evaluation. But what constitutes proper, relevant evaluation of the ID theorists and their motivation is a matter of dispute. And sometimes attacking a person as a method of evaluation is justified, and thus is not fallacious. The definition of ad hominem arguments as either a “good way” or a “bad way” rests on justification, which I argue ID opponents have. The basis for these good objections relies on the motivation many Christians have to share their faith with non-Christians, which they call the “great commission.”Author's Profile
DOI
10.1111/j.1467-9744.2012.01254.x
My notes
Similar books and articles
Motives Still Don't Matter: Reply to Pynes.Jeffrey Koperski & Andrés Ruiz - 2012 - Zygon 47 (4):662-665.
Two bad ways to attack intelligent design and two good ones.Jeffrey Koperski - 2008 - Zygon 43 (2):433-449.
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 Rejection of Testimony and the Normative Recommendation of Non-Fallacious 'ad hominem' Arguments Based on Hume's 'Of Miracles' and Canadian Law.Joel M. Buenting - 2005 - Auslegung 27 (2):1 - 16.
Intelligent Design and the End of Science.Jeffrey Koperski - 2003 - American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 77 (4):567-588.
A Case Study in 'ad hominem' Arguments: Fichte's "Science of Knowledge".Peter Suber - 1990 - Philosophy and Rhetoric 23 (1):12 - 42.
The Design Revolution: Answering the Tough Questions About Intelligent Design. [REVIEW]Jeffrey Koperski - 2004 - American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 78 (4):674-679.
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.
The Greek Roots of the Ad Hominem-Argument.Graciela Marta Chichi - 2002 - Argumentation 16 (3):333-348.
Hume and the argument for biological design.Graham Oppy - 1996 - Biology and Philosophy 11 (4):519-534.
Argumentation Schemes and Historical Origins of the Circumstantial Ad Hominem Argument.D. N. Walton - 2004 - Argumentation 18 (3):359-368.
In Defence of Intelligent Design.William Dembski - 2006 - In Philip Clayton (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Religion and Science. Oxford University Press. pp. 715-731.
Should Intelligent Design be Taught in Public School Science Classrooms?Anya Plutynski - 2010 - Science & Education 19 (6-8):779-795.
Analytics
Added to PP
2012-05-23
Downloads
147 (#87,405)
6 months
3 (#227,001)
2012-05-23
Downloads
147 (#87,405)
6 months
3 (#227,001)
Historical graph of downloads
Author's Profile
Citations of this work
In defence of virtue: The legitimacy of agent-based argument appraisal.Andrew Aberdein - 2014 - Informal Logic 34 (1):77-93.
Fallacy and argumentational vice.Andrew Aberdein - 2013 - In Dima Mohammed & Marcin Lewinski (eds.), Virtues of argumentation: Proceedings of the 10th International Conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation (OSSA), May 22–25, 2013. OSSA.
Motives Still Don't Matter: Reply to Pynes.Jeffrey Koperski & Andrés Ruiz - 2012 - Zygon 47 (4):662-665.
Motives still don't matter: Reply to Pynes.Jeffrey Koperski Andrés Ruiz - 2012 - Zygon 47 (4):662-665.
References found in this work
Two bad ways to attack intelligent design and two good ones.Jeffrey Koperski - 2008 - Zygon 43 (2):433-449.