Ad hominem arguments in practical argumentation

Argumentation 9 (2):363-370 (1995)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This paper is ultimately about the nature of argumentation in general and about the nature of practical argumentation in particular. (Practical argumentation is the form of argumentation which aims at answering the question: ‘What is to be done?’) The approach adopted here is an indirect one. I analyze one traditional form of argumentive fallacyargumentum ad hominem and try to show that in some argumentative situations it is an intuitively legitimate move. These intuitions can be explained if we accept that practical argumentation is also governed by the general rules of practical rationality

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 89,491

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Walton, Douglas (1998). Ad Hominem Arguments.John Woods - 2001 - Argumentation 15 (4):503-507.
Ad Hominem Fallacies, Bias, and Testimony.Audrey Yap - 2013 - Argumentation 27 (2):97-109.
The structure of argumentation in health product messages.Douglas Walton - 2010 - Argument and Computation 1 (3):179-198.

Analytics

Added to PP
2013-01-17

Downloads
62 (#231,225)

6 months
3 (#428,620)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Eerik Lagerspetz
University of Turku

Citations of this work

Attacking authority.Matthews Steve - 2011 - Australian Journal of Professional and Applied Ethics 13 (2):59-70.

Add more citations

References found in this work

A practical study of argument.Trudy Govier - 1991 - Belmont, Calif.: Wadsworth Pub. Co..
Introduction to Logic.Irving M. Copi - 1954 - Philosophy 29 (110):271-271.
Practical inference.Georg Henrik von Wright - 1963 - Philosophical Review 72 (2):159-179.
Critical thinking.Max Black - 1946 - New York,: Prentice-Hall.

View all 10 references / Add more references