What do I think? Well, I still think both the "barf" reference and the
"Jezebel" reference are ad hominem references.
One aspect of the meaning on "jezebel" may include a characteristic that you
feel applies to Judy, but since there are many dimensions to the word, other
uses of the word will undoubtedly come to mind. This is no different than
Lance's saying that Judy would make a good Muslim. While he may feel that
one of the characteristics of muslims applies to Judy, to say that she would
make a good muslim brings to mind many other undesirable characteristics.
Did you like it when Jim Elsman called you "butterball"? There may of been
some nuance of that which Elsman felt was true, but I did not feel like it
gave him a right to call you that.
I think it all amounts to name-calling, which is ad-hominem in nature.
Perry
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Re:On Judy once again employing the ad hom (Barf
for Karl Barth)
Date: Sat, 03 Dec 2005 14:54:27 -0500
Comments concerning Webster are correct, I am sure. But I included the
only definition Webster entertains in the referenced work. One simply
cannot say that the writing "is just plain stupid" without casting doubt on
the intellectual abilities of the author. "Barf" is not the man's name
and Judy speaks these words as would a well trained parrot. She has so
committed herself to the disgracing of Barth as to render her comments
bigoted and biased -- words and judgments written without personal
knowing. I regard these words as both ignorant and stupid -- and the
glory of it all is that I get to say such things without crossing the line
of "ad hom" because I have limited my attack to her words and not to her
person. Asinine. Such a line solves no problems and allows the kind of
negative immaturity that typifies TT discussions .
"Barf" is vomit, Perry. It no more is beyond "ad hom" than calling Judy
Jezebel. She is not a whore and Barth is not a pile of vomit. If you
disagree, then I will argue that Jezebel decribes the whoring words of one
who has prostituted the truth for a lie.................and it will become
a part of my presentations here on TT. I will use it to describe Judy in
the same sense that The Revelations uses the word.
What do you think?
jd
-----Original Message-----
From: Charles Perry Locke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Sat, 03 Dec 2005 10:36:14 -0800
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Re:On Judy once again employing the ad hom (Barf
for Karl Barth)
John, there are many dimensions to the ad-hominem argument on which
Webster's does not elaborate. In fact, the way the ad hominem attack is
most often used on TT is to demean the opponent for 1) hoping to discredit
them to the point that their arguments seem untrustworthy, 2) to throw a
red herring into the argument to avoid answering the opponent's argument,
and 3) is almost alays a sign of defeat in the argument.
...and "Jezebel" is one such ad-hominem.
While "Barf" for "Barth" is indeed an ad hominem, it is meant to discredit
a third party to which the opponent has referred as an authority. However,
it is not intended to demean the opponent him/herself. Terry did the same
by saying Calvin would make a good Muslim. I do not consider these critical
ad-hominems since they are not intended to hurt or demean other TT members,
although they are still a poor technique in argumentation.
Side bar...in my recent survey of the ad-hominem reference I was surprised
to find that it is, in some types of arguments, regarded as an effective
argument...and that was exclusively in political debate.
Perry
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Reply-To: [email protected]
>To: [email protected]
>Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Re:On Judy once again employing the ad hom (Barf
>for Karl Barth)
>Date: Sat, 03 Dec 2005 11:12:22 -0500
>
>Total chunky style barnyard. By the same logic, I can call you Jezebel
>Taylor and Kevin "Dunce Deegan" and and so on. And "ad hom" has no such
>limitations except here on TT. Ad hom is an attack on the person or words
>of an individual "rather than an appeal to pure reason" (Webster's
>Encyclopedic Dictionary.)
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: [email protected]
>Cc: [email protected]
>Sent: Sat, 3 Dec 2005 07:53:12 -0500
>Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Re:On Judy once again employing the ad hom (Barf
>for Karl Barth)
>
>
>Oh Lance, I forgot to mention that I can not take credit for your
>descriptive subject line
>It is an original Kevinism (if I remember correctly) but after perusing
>some of the subject's
>theological ideas I found it appropriate.
>
>Remember ad hom is against the person. I don't know the man; my comment
>reflects my
>response to his theology which has been made very public..
>
----------
"Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may
know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6)
http://www.InnGlory.org
If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a
friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
----------
"Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you
ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org
If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL
PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to
join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
