Argumentation 27 (2):97-109 (2013)

Audrey Yap
University of Victoria
An ad hominem fallacy is committed when an individual employs an irrelevant personal attack against an opponent instead of addressing that opponent’s argument. Many discussions of such fallacies discuss judgments of relevance about such personal attacks, and consider how we might distinguish those that are relevant from those that are not. This paper will argue that the literature on bias and testimony can helpfully contribute to that analysis. This will highlight ways in which biases, particularly unconscious biases, can make ad hominem fallacies seem effective, even when the irrelevance is recognized
Keywords Critical thinking  Informal logic  Ad hominem fallacies  Credibility  Testimony  Bias  Unconscious bias
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/s10503-011-9260-5
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 58,849
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Trust and Antitrust.Annette Baier - 1986 - Ethics 96 (2):231-260.
The Place of Testimony in the Fabric of Knowledge and Justification.Robert Audi - 1997 - American Philosophical Quarterly 34 (4):405 - 422.

View all 10 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Feminist Perspectives on Argumentation.Catherine E. Hundleby - forthcoming - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

View all 12 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Strategies of Character Attack.Fabrizio Macagno - 2013 - Argumentation 27 (4):1-33.
Three Fallacies.Jonathan E. Adler - 2000 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 23 (5):665-666.
A Feeling Disputation.Michael J. Wreen - 1997 - Dialogue 36 (4):787-.


Added to PP index

Total views
173 ( #57,156 of 2,426,109 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
16 ( #45,921 of 2,426,109 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes