 |
| Windows: Ronda, Italy |
I previously documented a related Pirie entry:
October 16 2015
PIRIE, MADSEN (2006)(2015) How To Win Every Argument, Bloomsbury, London.
Ad Hominem/Against the Man
'If you cannot attack the argument, attack the arguer.' Pirie (2006)(2015: 122).
The author states that an insult in itself is not fallacious, (122) but ad hominem is used in a way to attempt to undermine an opponent's argument. (122).
Yes, I have been reviewing the Pirie text this long!
Once I have completed the Pirie and Langer philosophy text reviews, I have several other new academic texts awaiting possible review. I do reason it very important to provide Biblical Studies entries, but as my PhD is in Theology and Philosophy of Religion, I also need to research and provide entries within those academic fields as well. I have employment at present, but wish to promote myself in all areas of possible work.
I realize that the Langer, Symbolic Logic text reviews can be very tedious, but in my reasoning, it is required reading for my work. This is a reason I provide various types of entries. I also provide Satire Und Theology entries which are hopefully, short and sweet.
Ad Hominem Argument Circumstantial
With this fallacy 'the appeal is to the special circumstances of the person with whom one is arguing. Instead of trying to prove the contention true of false on the evidence, its acceptance is urged because of the position and interests of those appealed to.' (124).
Cited
'You can't accept the legitimacy of lending for profit. You are a Christian, and Christ drove out the money lenders from the temple.' (124).
Pirie explains that the Christian is invited to agree because of Christian convictions. (124).
I agree that this would be fallacious argumentation. Jesus Christ in the biblical context is removing the business of moneychanging and related banking from the temple. This should not be expanded to Christian theology and philosophy where all moneychanging, money lending and banking is therefore considered, sinful, immoral and unethical. In other words, banking outside of the temple, or in our modern context, the Christian Church, is not necessarily sinful, immoral and unethical.
Interestingly, the British author also documents the example of nominal Christians that in reality do not follow biblical views in their personal lives. The nominal Christian could then be 'forced into a reluctant and resentful acquiescence you could never have gained otherwise.' (125).
Problematically, many nominal Christians are biblically illiterate to the point where he/she may very well be unaware whether Jesus Christ's actions of removing moneychanging and banking from the temple, in the New Testament Gospels, would therefore require a modern-day Christian theology and philosophy that is anti-lending and anti-banking.
Context is extremely important within Biblical Studies.
