Argumentation

, Volume 18, Issue 3, pp 359–368 | Cite as

Argumentation Schemes and Historical Origins of the Circumstantial Ad Hominem Argument

  • D. N. Walton
Article

Abstract

There are two views of the ad hominem argument found in the textbooks and other traditional treatments of this argument, the Lockean or ex concessis view and the view of ad hominem as personal attack. This article addresses problems posed by this ambiguity. In particular, it discusses the problem of whether Aristotle's description of the ex concessis type of argument should count as evidence that he had identified the circumstantial ad hominem argument. Argumentation schemes are used as the basis for drawing a distinction between this latter form of argument and another called argument from commitment, corresponding to the ex concessis argument.

argumentation schemes commitment contradiction dialogue theory eristic fallacy inconsistency personal attack refutation 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

REFERENCES

  1. Aristotle: 1939, Topics, trans. E. S. Forster, Loeb Classical Library, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
  2. Aristotle:1928, On Sophistical Refutations, Loeb Classical Library, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
  3. Barnes, Jonathan: 1997, Logic and the Imperial Stoa, Brill, Leiden.Google Scholar
  4. Barth, E. M. and J. L. Martens: 1977, “Argumentum Ad Hominem: From Chaos to Formal Dialectic”, Logique at Analyse 77 -78, 76 -96.Google Scholar
  5. Brinton, Alan: 1985, “A Rhetorical View of the Ad Hominem”9;, Australasian Journal of Philosophy 63, 50-63.Google Scholar
  6. Brinton, Alan: 1995, “The Ad Hominem”9;, in Hans V. Hansen and Robert C. Pinto (eds.), Fallacies:Classical and Contemporary Readings, Penn State Press, University Park, PA, 213 -222.Google Scholar
  7. Chichi, Graciela Marta: 2002, “The Greek Roots of the Ad HominemArgument”, Argumentation 16, 333 -348.Google Scholar
  8. Freeman, James B.: 1995, “The Appeal to Popularity and Presumption by Common Knowledge”, in Hans V. Hansen and Robert C. Pinto (eds.), Fallacies:Classical and Contemporary Readings, The Pennsylvania State University Press, University Park, PA.Google Scholar
  9. Hamblin, Charles L.: 1970, Fallacies, Methuen, London.Google Scholar
  10. Hintikka, Jaakko: 1993, “Socratic Questioning, Logic and Rhetoric”, Revue Internationale de Philosophie 1, 5 -30.Google Scholar
  11. Jevons, W. Stanley: 1883, The Elements of Logic, Sheldon, New York.Google Scholar
  12. Locke, John: 1961, An Essay Concerning Human Understanding(1690), ed. John Yolton, Dent, London.Google Scholar
  13. Mansfeld, Jaap: 1994, Prolegomena:Questions to be Settled Before the Study of An Author, or a Text, Brill, Leiden.Google Scholar
  14. Nuchelmans, Gabriel: 1993, “On the Fourfold Root of the Argumentum Ad Hominem”9;, in Erik C. W. Krabbe, Renee Jose Dalitz and Pier A. Smit (eds.), Empirical Logic and Public Debate, Rodopi, Amsterdam, 37 -47.Google Scholar
  15. Read, Carveth: 1901, Logic:Deductive and Inductive, Simpkin, Marshall, Hamilton, Kent and Co., London.Google Scholar
  16. van Eemeren, Frans H. and Rob Grootendorst: 1993, “The History of the Argumentum ad HominemSince the Seventeenth Century”, in Erik C. W. Krabbe, Renee Jose Dalitz and Pier A Smit (eds.), Empirical Logic and Public Debate, Rodopi, Amsterdam, 49 -68.Google Scholar
  17. Walton, Douglas: 1996, Argumentation Schemes for Presumptive Reasoning, Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ.Google Scholar
  18. Walton, Douglas: 1998, Ad Hominem Arguments, University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa.Google Scholar
  19. Walton, Douglas: 2001, “Searching for the Roots of the Circumstantial Ad Hominem”9;, Argumentation 15, 207 -221.Google Scholar
  20. Whately, Richard: 1848, Elements of Logic(1826), 9th ed., Longmans, London.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • D. N. Walton
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PhilosophyUniversity of WinnipegManitobaCanada

Personalised recommendations