On 2010-11-23 10:08:12 -0500, Keith H Duggar said:
There is a well-known name for such illogical reasoning: ad hominem.
You don't understand ad hominem:
"The ad hominem is a classic logical fallacy,[2] but it is not always
fallacious. For in some instances, questions of personal conduct,
character, motives, etc., are legitimate and relevant to the issue.[3]"
Source: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem>
Sometimes the person's conduct and motives *are relevant* to the point
under discussion. Financial conflict of interest is a perfect example
where it *is* legitimate and relevant to explore a person's motives and
conduct outside of the debate.
In this case, JH's conduct outside of the debate (i.e., the fact that
he earns his living by selling tools and training for a particular set
of languages) and his motives (i.e., he is therefore financially
motivated to present these languages in the best possible light and to
trash-talk other languages), render his arguments in the debate
inherently suspect.
warmest regards,
Ralph
--
Raffael Cavallaro
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
