Want to get notified of all questions as they are asked? Update your mail preferences and turn on "Instant Notification."
Get all EIGHT of Bo's printed books, all autographed*. Save over $50!
* This offer is for residents of United States and Canada only.
|
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 |
|
|