|
Kevin wrote:
I do however agree with a open exchange of words and ideas, and still think
AD HOM is for SISSIES!
In the same way that sound argument is for sissies?
You misunderstand the point of the ad hominem rule. It isn't to protect people's
feelings and be nice, it is to encourage people to present a cogent
argument about an idea rather than simply register their disdain for the
individual who advanced it (whether now or at some other point in
history).
Debbie
|
- Re: [TruthTalk] Apologetic for... David Miller
- Re: [TruthTalk] Apologetic for... Lance Muir
- Re: [TruthTalk] Apologetic for the eternal sons... Kevin Deegan
- RE: [TruthTalk] Apologetic for the eternal sonship of Ch... ShieldsFamily
- Re: [TruthTalk] Apologetic for the eternal sonship of Ch... [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Re: [TruthTalk] Apologetic for the eternal sonship of Ch... Kevin Deegan
- Re: [TruthTalk] Apologetic for the eternal sonship ... knpraise
- Re: [TruthTalk] Apologetic for the eternal sons... Kevin Deegan
- Re: [TruthTalk] Apologetic for the eternal ... Debbie Sawczak
- Re: [TruthTalk] Apologetic for the eter... Kevin Deegan
- RE: [TruthTalk] Apologetic for the eter... ShieldsFamily
- Re: [TruthTalk] Apologetic for the eter... David Miller
- Re: [TruthTalk] Apologetic for the eternal sonship of Ch... Kevin Deegan
- Re: [TruthTalk] Apologetic for the eternal sonship ... knpraise
- Re: [TruthTalk] Apologetic for the eternal sons... Kevin Deegan
- Re: [TruthTalk] Apologetic for the eternal sons... Kevin Deegan
- Re: [TruthTalk] Apologetic for the eternal ... Kevin Deegan
- Re: [TruthTalk] Apologetic for the eternal sons... David Miller

