Here's a short piece by the Nobel Laureate economist Paul Krugman, discussing (among other things) the difference between an ad hominem attack and calling a spade a spade.
http://www.truth-out.org/truth-hurts/1320765031
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Though the author is correct that this isn't an ad hominem attack, this argument does perhaps commit a fallacy of composition. Just because the majority of republicans--and especially republican leaders--favor "dirtier air, dirtier water and less people with health insurance," (shouldn't that be fewer people?) does not mean that all republicans do so, or that this is a prerequisite point of view one needs in order to join the republican party.
Also, love the Monty Python reference!
Yes, it should probably be 'fewer.'
I think it's clear from context that he his speaking about the direct consequences of policies that are central to the Republican platform; no implication that all self-admitted Republicans necessarily subscribe, except perhaps tacitly.
I think that what upsets Paul Ryan is Obama's use of ad populum indirect. Although it might be true that Republican proposals could have these effects, the way that Obama puts it certainly plays on the emotions of the people.
Post a Comment