<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Mistakes we Make in Thinking &#8211; Ad Hominem Arguments</title>
	<atom:link href="http://safle.org/wordpress/2006/11/07/mistakes-we-make-in-thinking-3-ad-hominem-arguments.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://safle.org/wordpress/2006/11/07/mistakes-we-make-in-thinking-3-ad-hominem-arguments.html</link>
	<description>Pretentious Waffle from Wales</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 03 Mar 2012 19:18:50 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: bionard</title>
		<link>http://safle.org/wordpress/2006/11/07/mistakes-we-make-in-thinking-3-ad-hominem-arguments.html/comment-page-1#comment-37907</link>
		<dc:creator>bionard</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Nov 2007 00:54:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://safle.org/wordpress/2006/11/07/mistakes-we-make-in-thinking-3-ad-hominem-arguments.html#comment-37907</guid>
		<description>The other type of ad hominem argument is a form of genetic fallacy. Arguments of this kind focus not on the evidence for a view but on the character of the person advancing it; they seek to discredit positions by discrediting those who hold them. It is always important to attack arguments, rather than arguers, and this is where ad hominems fall down.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The other type of ad hominem argument is a form of genetic fallacy. Arguments of this kind focus not on the evidence for a view but on the character of the person advancing it; they seek to discredit positions by discrediting those who hold them. It is always important to attack arguments, rather than arguers, and this is where ad hominems fall down.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stephen</title>
		<link>http://safle.org/wordpress/2006/11/07/mistakes-we-make-in-thinking-3-ad-hominem-arguments.html/comment-page-1#comment-3694</link>
		<dc:creator>Stephen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 11 Nov 2006 14:56:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://safle.org/wordpress/2006/11/07/mistakes-we-make-in-thinking-3-ad-hominem-arguments.html#comment-3694</guid>
		<description>Thanks, Steven. I agree that this is also another type of ad hominem, and one that we can all too easily think refiutes argument (A), when in fact it does not.

Thanks for your input.

Stephen</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks, Steven. I agree that this is also another type of ad hominem, and one that we can all too easily think refiutes argument (A), when in fact it does not.</p>
<p>Thanks for your input.</p>
<p>Stephen</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steven Carr</title>
		<link>http://safle.org/wordpress/2006/11/07/mistakes-we-make-in-thinking-3-ad-hominem-arguments.html/comment-page-1#comment-3676</link>
		<dc:creator>Steven Carr</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 11 Nov 2006 10:53:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://safle.org/wordpress/2006/11/07/mistakes-we-make-in-thinking-3-ad-hominem-arguments.html#comment-3676</guid>
		<description>Ad hominem also has another meaning, although it also is &#039;against the man&#039;, but has nothing to do with attacking his character.

If soembody believes A, but also believes B, then pointing out that B contradicts A, is not a refutation of A, even if it is true that B contradicts A.

It simply means that the man has contradictory beliefs, but that does not in itself prove that either one of them is false.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ad hominem also has another meaning, although it also is &#8216;against the man&#8217;, but has nothing to do with attacking his character.</p>
<p>If soembody believes A, but also believes B, then pointing out that B contradicts A, is not a refutation of A, even if it is true that B contradicts A.</p>
<p>It simply means that the man has contradictory beliefs, but that does not in itself prove that either one of them is false.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

