Want to get notified of all questions as they are asked? Update your mail preferences and turn on "Instant Notification."
Many of our ideas about the world are based more on feelings than facts, sensibilities than science, and rage than reality. We gravitate toward ideas that make us feel comfortable in areas such as religion, politics, philosophy, social justice, love and sex, humanity, and morality. We avoid ideas that make us feel uncomfortable. This avoidance is a largely unconscious process that affects our judgment and gets in the way of our ability to reach rational and reasonable conclusions. By understanding how our mind works in this area, we can start embracing uncomfortable ideas and be better informed, be more understanding of others, and make better decisions in all areas of life.
* This is for the author's bookstore only. Applies to autographed hardcover, audiobook, and ebook.
|
To commit the ad hominem (guilt by association) fallacy, one would discount a source or an argument simply because that source or the advocate is associated something already viewed negatively. In your case 1, B claims that X is false. When asked why, it seems B would say something like, "A claimed X was true. I view A negatively, therefore I see whatever A says as incorrect." B rejects A's claim because he sees A as being associated with something else negative. In your case 2, B claims that X is false. When asked why, it seems B would say something like, "Both A and Z claim X to be true. Since I view Z negatively, what Z says is not correct." B rejects A's claim because of Z's association with something else negative. Each case seems to be one of rejecting a claim because "bad folks" support it. Each is an example of ad hominem (guilt by association) ... the argument doesn't rest on anything related to what Claim X is ... just on who's making or supporting it. |
answered on Tuesday, Feb 01, 2022 11:15:19 AM by Arlo | |
Arlo Suggested These Categories |
|
Comments |
|
|