[情報] 一篇關於版友討論時常犯錯誤的文章置底

看板politics作者 (雜種...那又怎樣)時間19年前 (2004/09/03 13:13), 編輯推噓12(12015)
留言27則, 17人參與, 最新討論串1/2 (看更多)
http://www.intrepidsoftware.com/fallacy/attack.php Attacking the Person (argumentum ad hominem) Definition: The person presenting an argument is attacked instead of the argument itself. This takes many forms. For example,the person's character, nationality or religion may be attacked. Alternatively, it may be pointed out that a person stands to gain from a favourable outcome. Or, finally, a person may be attacked by association, or by the company he keeps. There are three major forms of Attacking the Person: ad hominem (abusive): instead of attacking an assertion, the argument attacks the person who made the assertion. ad hominem (circumstantial): instead of attacking an assertion the author points to the relationship between the person making the assertion and the person's circumstances. ad hominem (tu quoque): this form of attack on the person notes that a person does not practise what he preaches. Examples: You may argue that God doesn't exist, but you are just following a fad. (ad hominem abusive) We should discount what Premier Klein says about taxation because he won't be hurt by the increase. (ad hominem circumstantial) We should disregard Share B.C.'s argument because they are being funded by the logging industry. (ad hominem circumstantial) You say I shouldn't drink, but you haven't been sober for more than a year. ( ad hominem tu quoque) Proof: Identify the attack and show that the character or circumstances of the person has nothing to do with the truth or falsity of the proposition being defended. References: Barker: 166, Cedarblom and Paulsen: 155, Copi and Cohen: 97, Davis: 80 -- 我...喜歡過你唷y^_^y 但是...請不要再出現在我夢裏了 夢見你讓我真的覺得很幸福 可是...夢裏多幸福,醒來之後就多孤獨 不過,還是要謝謝那段日子你給我的笑容跟謝謝你給我這場好夢 別了 -- ※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc) ◆ From: 220.139.130.137

140.112.214.136 10/18, , 1F
那討論基礎在那裡?
140.112.214.136 10/18, 1F
※ 編輯: Iamaidiot 來自: 220.139.133.38 (04/12 00:38) ※ 編輯: Iamaidiot 來自: 61.217.105.148 (11/18 12:33)

09/02 04:23, , 2F
09/02 04:23, 2F

09/04 13:30, , 3F
罷免王金平
09/04 13:30, 3F

09/04 13:31, , 4F
推措
09/04 13:31, 4F

10/24 11:22, , 5F
不知道哪個候選人選舉連政見都提不出來
10/24 11:22, 5F

10/24 11:30, , 6F
推錯了,可以刪掉嗎?
10/24 11:30, 6F

12/12 21:13, , 7F
BALA
12/12 21:13, 7F

12/12 21:23, , 8F
BALA
12/12 21:23, 8F

12/12 22:55, , 9F
BALA
12/12 22:55, 9F

12/15 21:28, , 10F
大推
12/15 21:28, 10F

06/11 20:19, , 11F
公的肥肉包 ?
06/11 20:19, 11F

06/22 07:58, , 12F
找不出論點 , 便做人生攻擊 ,此真理也
06/22 07:58, 12F

07/28 03:08, , 13F
回你一句話 這種心態台灣永遠都不會進步
07/28 03:08, 13F

07/28 03:09, , 14F
推錯篇 抱歉
07/28 03:09, 14F

08/12 02:30, , 15F
葉菊蘭 就是深綠急獨的代表 蘇貞昌反而不是
08/12 02:30, 15F

08/13 11:37, , 16F
泛藍的根本連那網站都懶得上去,跟資
08/13 11:37, 16F

08/13 11:37, , 17F
訊又有何關係?一個不能代表任何事情
08/13 11:37, 17F

08/13 11:37, , 18F
的東西還奢望別人隨你們起舞?
08/13 11:37, 18F

08/13 11:38, , 19F
...........推錯篇了...-_-
08/13 11:38, 19F

10/06 21:22, , 20F
我是出了名的人來瘋啊 哈哈 刪
10/06 21:22, 20F

07/27 10:20, , 21F
這應該是邱毅和他有預謀 裝的啦
07/27 10:20, 21F

08/01 14:46, , 22F
民共和國
08/01 14:46, 22F

08/19 13:26, , 23F
abc
08/19 13:26, 23F

09/11 11:03, , 24F
那我投訴對方說我"洗腦過度",可以嗎?
09/11 11:03, 24F

09/16 19:01, , 25F
從李登輝出走之後
09/16 19:01, 25F

09/16 19:02, , 26F
推錯.
09/16 19:02, 26F

10/05 10:48, , 27F
推錯
10/05 10:48, 27F
文章代碼(AID): #11D_rvMW (politics)
文章代碼(AID): #11D_rvMW (politics)