Re: Glenn's ad hominems (was Stephen wrote:)

Ed Brayton (cynic@net-link.net)
Fri, 29 May 1998 12:09:05 -0400

Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: Ed Brayton: "Re: Introduction"
Previous message: Ron Chitwood: "Re: Jinmium overturned."

Ron Chitwood wrote:
>
> Hang in there, Stephen. You are VERY well-read on the topic of this thread
> and I, for one, appreciate your staunch, aggressive support of the
> 'creation' side of the debate.

Do you mean to say that he is very well read on the subject of ad
hominems? I think that is clearly untrue. He doesn't seem to have any
idea what an ad hominem actually is. He seems to think that anytime
anyone says anything that could be taken offensively, that is an ad
hominem. That is not the case. Ad hominem is a logical fallacy with a
specific definition.

Next message: Ed Brayton: "Re: Introduction"
Previous message: Ron Chitwood: "Re: Jinmium overturned."