What is an Ad Hominem Argument?

  

Number your paper from 1-4 and answer each question.Write a brief 1-2 sentence introduction defining the Ad Hominem Argument.In your own words,explain the meaning of afallaciousad hominem argument and give an original example.In your own words, explain the meaning of alegitimatead hominem argument and give an original example. Questions 2 and 3 should be answered thoroughly, with a minimum of 1complete paragraph for each question (3-5 sentences).In your own words, explain how understanding the distinction between a fallacious ad hominem argument and a legitimate ad hominem argument is important to ethical discussion. Question 4 should be more in-depth and descriptive.Use a minimum of two paragraphs (3-5 sentences each).Use a concluding sentence that summarizes your points about the distinction.Use 2 pieces of information from the assigned material to support your reasoning. Note: This information must be cited and referenced according to APA guidelines. If you summarize an idea that is not your own, it must be cited properly. If you quote directly from other material, it must be placed in quotation marks and cited properly. Use quotationsonlyif the quotation is short and the idea cannot be expressed in any other way.

1. Introduction
Ad Hominem is a type of argument that is used in ethical discussions. Understanding the difference between a fallacious ad hominem argument and a legitimate ad hominem argument is crucial to avoiding biased reasoning. In this paper, we will define Ad Hominem, provide an explanation of both fallacious and legitimate Ad Hominem arguments and explore the importance of understanding the difference between the two.

Don't use plagiarized sources. Get Your Custom Essay on
What is an Ad Hominem Argument?
Just from $13/Page
Order Essay

2. Definition of a Fallacious Ad Hominem Argument
A fallacious Ad Hominem argument refers to an argument that attacks the person making the argument instead of addressing the argument’s content. It is a type of logical fallacy that distracts from the topic at hand and undermines the credibility of the speaker. For instance, if someone argues that athletes should have a more relaxed dress code, and someone responds by saying “what do you know about fashion, you never dress well anyway,” this is a fallacious Ad Hominem argument.

3. Definition of a Legitimate Ad Hominem Argument
A legitimate Ad Hominem argument is an argument that considers the character, actions, or beliefs of the person making the argument while also considering the validity of the argument itself. In other words, a legitimate Ad Hominem argument can use the credibility of the individual to support or refute the argument’s validity. For instance, if a person argues that all politicians are corrupt, and someone responds by saying “you were removed from your political position for embezzlement,” this is a legitimate Ad Hominem argument.

4. Importance of Understanding the Distinction
Understanding the distinction between fallacious and legitimate Ad Hominem arguments is critical to ethical discussions because Ad Hominem arguments can be persuasive, often appealing to people’s emotions. Ad Hominem arguments are often used in debates where people are trying to defend their position, and this can lead to individuals using tactics that divert from the issue itself. It is important to understand the distinction because the use of a legitimate Ad Hominem argument may strengthen a debate while the use of a fallacious Ad Hominem argument can weaken one’s credibility. By understanding the difference, people can learn to recognize and avoid using fallacious arguments. As noted by Klein (2019), understanding the distinction between legitimate and fallacious Ad Hominem arguments “helps in distinguishing good arguments from bad ones and enhancing rational discourse.” It is thus crucial to differentiate between fallacious and legitimate Ad Hominem arguments to avoid biases, false conclusions, and flawed reasoning.

Reference
Klein, C. (2019). Ad Hominem. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved from https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/fallacies/#AdHominem.

Introduction:

Ad Hominem Argument is a commonly used argumentative strategy where a person attacks the character, motive, or any other irrelevant feature of the person advancing an argument, instead of trying to refute the argument itself.

1. Objectives and Learning Outcomes:

Objective: To understand the meaning of the fallacious ad hominem argument and the legitimate ad hominem argument.

Learning Outcomes:
– Students will be able to differentiate between fallacious and legitimate ad hominem arguments.
– Students will be able to identify examples of fallacious and legitimate ad hominem arguments.
– Students will be able to explain why understanding the distinction between fallacious and legitimate ad hominem arguments is important for ethical discussion.

2. In your own words, explain the meaning of a fallacious ad hominem argument and give an original example.

A fallacious ad hominem argument is an argument that attacks the character or personal traits of an individual instead of addressing the argument presented by the individual. It is a logical fallacy because it avoids the actual argument and tries to undermine the credibility of the person presenting it.

For example, if a politician is arguing for the implementation of a healthcare policy and his opponent responds by saying that he cannot be trusted because he had a previous DUI charge, then this is a fallacious ad hominem argument. It is irrelevant to the argument at hand and does not address the actual policy proposal.

3. In your own words, explain the meaning of a legitimate ad hominem argument and give an original example.

A legitimate ad hominem argument is an argument that attacks the character or personal traits of an individual when those traits are relevant to the argument being presented. It is not a logical fallacy if the character trait being used to undermine the argument is directly related to the argument being made.

For example, if a scientist is arguing the merits of a particular theory and it is revealed that the scientist has a history of fraud, then it is a legitimate ad hominem argument to question the credibility of the scientist in this particular area. In this case, the character trait being attacked is directly relevant to the argument being presented.

4. In your own words, explain how understanding the distinction between a fallacious ad hominem argument and a legitimate ad hominem argument is important to ethical discussion.

Understanding the distinction between fallacious and legitimate ad hominem arguments is essential for ethical discussions because it helps to promote critical thinking and rational argumentation. In ethical discussions, it is important to address the arguments being presented rather than attacking the person presenting them. Using fallacious ad hominem arguments can lead to a breakdown in communication and can undermine the credibility of the person making the argument.

On the other hand, the use of legitimate ad hominem arguments can be a powerful tool in helping to further ethical discussions. It can help to expose conflicts of interest or biases that may be affecting the person making the argument and can help to promote transparency and credibility in the discussion. For example, if a person is presenting an argument in favor of animal rights but has a history of animal cruelty, then it is important to address this in the discussion in order to understand the potential biases of the person presenting the argument.

In conclusion, understanding the distinction between fallacious and legitimate ad hominem arguments is crucial to ethical discussion because it promotes rational discourse and helps to identify potential biases that may be affecting the argument being presented. According to (Hawthorne, 2016), using ad hominem arguments effectively requires a lot of discernment, sensitivity, and a clear understanding of the situation and the arguments being presented.

Reference:
Hawthorne, J. (2016). Ad hominem arguments in ethics. Philosophical explorations, 19(1), 47-59.

Solution 1: Differentiating a Fallacious Ad Hominem Argument from a Legitimate Ad Hominem Argument

1. Introduction
An ad hominem argument is a logical fallacy that involves attacking the person making the argument instead of addressing the argument. This paper discusses two types of ad hominem arguments: fallacious and legitimate.

2. Fallacious Ad Hominem Argument
A fallacious ad hominem argument is an argument that is logically flawed because it attacks the person making the argument rather than the argument itself. For example, if someone argues that smoking is harmful to health, and their opponent responds by saying, “You’re just saying that because you’re a doctor who wants to scare people into visiting you,” then they have made a fallacious ad hominem argument. This argument ignores the evidence presented by the first person and instead attacks their credibility.

3. Legitimate Ad Hominem Argument
A legitimate ad hominem argument is an argument where the character, actions, or behaviors of the person making the argument are relevant to the argument. For example, if a politician advocates for policies that discriminate against a certain group of people and it is revealed that they have a history of making discriminatory statements, then their past behavior is relevant to the argument.

4. The Importance of Understanding the Distinction
Understanding the distinction between fallacious and legitimate ad hominem arguments is important for ethical discussions because it helps us make valid judgments. If we fail to recognize a fallacious ad hominem argument, we may end up accepting an argument that is false or irrelevant. On the other hand, if we fail to recognize a legitimate ad hominem argument, we may overlook important information that is relevant to the argument. According to Walton (2008), “Making character assessments is a crucial part of ethical deliberation, and detecting different types of ad hominem arguments is essential for being able to make accurate and fair assessments of character when they are called for” (p. 8). In other words, understanding the distinction is necessary for making accurate assessments of character, which in turn can lead to more ethical and just decisions.

Solution 2: Evaluating the Significance of Ad Hominem Arguments in Ethical Discussions

1. Introduction
Ad hominem arguments are often used in ethical discussions. This paper aims to evaluate the significance of ad hominem arguments in ethical discussions.

2. Ad Hominem Arguments in Ethical Discussions
Ad hominem arguments are common in ethical discussions because character assessments are an important part of ethical deliberation. For example, one might question the effectiveness of a politician who advocates for policies that discriminate against a certain group of people if that same politician has been found guilty of discrimination in the past. This type of argument is legitimate because it is relevant to the discussion and provides important information about the person advocating for the policy.

3. The Distinction Between Fallacious and Legitimate Ad Hominem Arguments
It is crucial to distinguish between fallacious and legitimate ad hominem arguments in ethical discussions because it affects the accuracy of the argument. In many cases, fallacious ad hominem arguments are used to distract from the real issues at hand, thus preventing constructive discussion. Legitimate ad hominem arguments, on the other hand, are used to assess someone’s character or credibility, which can be relevant to the argument.

4. Importance of Recognizing the Distinction
Recognizing and understanding the differences between fallacious and legitimate ad hominem arguments is important for ethical discussions. This is because it allows us to evaluate the credibility and character of the people making the argument, making us better equipped to make informed and fair decisions. As Walton (2008) notes, “Awareness of the distinction can help in identifying whether an argument is an attack on character or a valid criticism of it” (p. 113). In other words, understanding the distinction helps us determine whether an argument is based on facts and evidence or simply an attack on the opponent’s character. This leads to more productive and meaningful ethical discussions.

Introduction:

An ad hominem argument is a type of argument that attacks the individual instead of focusing on the argument itself. In simpler terms, it is an attack on the person making the argument rather than the argument itself. It is a type of logical fallacy where the attacker tries to discredit or undermine an argument by attacking the person presenting the argument.

1. Suggested Resources/Books:
– “Logical Fallacies: The Definitive Guide to Flawless Rhetoric and Bulletproof Logic” by Micheal Withey
– “The Art of Reasoning” by David Kelley

2. What is a fallacious ad hominem argument?
A fallacious ad hominem argument is a type of argument that attacks the person making the argument instead of the actual argument. It is a logical fallacy because it does not address the actual argument presented. For example, if someone presents an argument that vaccines are beneficial, and another person responds by attacking the presenter’s education or profession, it is a fallacious ad hominem argument. The attacker is not addressing the actual argument and is instead attacking the presenter’s personal character, which is irrelevant to the argument.

3. What is a legitimate ad hominem argument?
A legitimate ad hominem argument, on the other hand, is an argument that considers the personal character or background of the person making the argument as relevant to the argument itself. It is valid to consider a person’s experience or expertise in a particular field when evaluating their argument. For example, if a medical doctor presents an argument in favor of a certain medical treatment, it is legitimate to consider their expertise and experience when evaluating their argument. However, it is important to note that a legitimate ad hominem argument is still about the argument itself and not the person presenting the argument.

4. Why understanding the distinction between a fallacious ad hominem argument and a legitimate ad hominem argument is important to ethical discussion?
Understanding the distinction between a fallacious ad hominem argument and a legitimate ad hominem argument is critical for ethical discussions. It is essential to address and evaluate arguments based on their merit and evidence alone rather than personal attacks. This distinction also helps to prevent discrimination and biases that may arise when evaluating arguments based on personal characteristics rather than the evidence presented. According to Kelley (1998), “legitimate ad hominem arguments are those that help to establish the credibility of a source,” while “fallacious ad hominem arguments are those that are irrelevant to the conclusion of an argument” (p. 85). In summary, understanding the difference between these two types of ad hominem arguments helps to promote critical thinking and fair evaluations of arguments.

Basic features
  • Free title page and bibliography
  • Unlimited revisions
  • Plagiarism-free guarantee
  • Money-back guarantee
  • 24/7 support
On-demand options
  • Writer’s samples
  • Part-by-part delivery
  • Overnight delivery
  • Copies of used sources
  • Expert Proofreading
Paper format
  • 275 words per page
  • 12 pt Arial/Times New Roman
  • Double line spacing
  • Any citation style (APA, MLA, Chicago/Turabian, Harvard)

Our guarantees

Delivering a high-quality product at a reasonable price is not enough anymore.
That’s why we have developed 5 beneficial guarantees that will make your experience with our service enjoyable, easy, and safe.

Money-back guarantee

You have to be 100% sure of the quality of your product to give a money-back guarantee. This describes us perfectly. Make sure that this guarantee is totally transparent.

Read more

Zero-plagiarism guarantee

Each paper is composed from scratch, according to your instructions. It is then checked by our plagiarism-detection software. There is no gap where plagiarism could squeeze in.

Read more

Free-revision policy

Thanks to our free revisions, there is no way for you to be unsatisfied. We will work on your paper until you are completely happy with the result.

Read more

Privacy policy

Your email is safe, as we store it according to international data protection rules. Your bank details are secure, as we use only reliable payment systems.

Read more

Fair-cooperation guarantee

By sending us your money, you buy the service we provide. Check out our terms and conditions if you prefer business talks to be laid out in official language.

Read more
× How can I help you?