Julia Jones julia.lysator@jajones.demon.co.uk wrote:
In message Pine.OSF.3.96.1010516104017.30747A-100000@bscomp, Iain Coleman ijc@bas.ac.uk writes
For example, 'Your observations don't prove that the Earth goes round the Sun, because you're a useless wanker with no more right to live on God's Earth than a weasel' commits the ad hominem fallacy. On the other hand, 'The motion of the Earth is demonstrated quite unambiguously by Foucault's pendulum, you stupid cunt', is a valid argument followed by an insult.
Trust an astrophysicist to pick that example:-) It's interesting to see the Church's argument nowadays as to why it was right to treat dissenters as it did...
I thought he did understand the difference, but was not very good at demonstrating what he meant. The above is a much better demonstration of how to be rude without indulging in the ad hominem fallacy. -- Julia Jones "Science is not about building a body of known 'facts'. It is a method for asking awkward questions and subjecting them to a reality-check, thus avoiding the human tendency to believe whatever makes us feel good." - The Science of Discworld
In one of the Sherlock Holmes stories didn't he say to the effect that it did not matter to him whether the Earth went round the sun or the moon?
Jacqui __________________________________________________________________ Get your own FREE, personal Netscape Webmail account today at http://webmail.netscape.com/