What is 'ad hominem' really?
The philosophical term 'ad hominem' refers not to arguments consisting in attacks on the character or competence of the opponent but rather arguments that assume a premise that the opponent will accept and then argue from that to a conclusion the opponent will have difficulty accepting. This sort of argument does not intend to show the truth of the conclusion but merely force the opponent to rethink his/her position. The Socrates of the Platonic dialogues uses this sort of argument frequently. I think philosophers should reclaim the traditional meaning of 'ad hominem' and restore the respectability of arguments so characterized.
No comments:
Post a Comment