From: joedees@bellsouth.net
Date: Wed Aug 21 2002 - 12:06:29 MDT
On 21 Aug 2002 at 11:46, rhinoceros wrote:
>
> [Joe Dees]
> Once again, the ad hominem attack; no refutation of the message, but
> an attack upon the messenger.
>
>
> [rhinoceros]
>
> But the subject of this post *is* the messenger.
>
> Of course, if it was about a particular message of the messenger, that
> should be addressed on its own merit -- perhaps taking also into
> account the messenger's bias, special interest, previous lies, and
> other merits or shortcomings (see previous comments about Pravda).
>
>
> [Joe Dees]
> Okay, let's talk about the messenger - I mean the writer of not only
> the article posted but also the MEMRI article. This person has
> seemingly created a lucrative and publishable cottage industry for
> himself bashing neocons. Not that there's not plenty available to
> bash there, but ideas should not be accepted or dismissed depending
> upon the source's purported membership, or lack of it, in a lauded or
> despised group.
>
>
> [rhinoceros]
> In the context of this particular thread, that would be ad hominem.
>
Either ad hominem against both accused neocons and the accsing
article writer is acceptable, or it is acceptable against neither. Make up
your mind. It cannot be acceptable against either but not the other.
>
> ----
> This message was posted by rhinoceros to the Virus 2002 board on
> Church of Virus BBS.
> <http://virus.lucifer.com/bbs/index.php?board=51;action=display;thread
> id=26206>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Sep 25 2002 - 13:28:54 MDT