Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: [creationevolutiondebate] ad hominem

Expand Messages
  • Schmuel
    Hi Folks, Drew Smith ... No, criticizing those evolutionists for not speaking on the Mirecki assault case might be off-topic (although I don t really see that,
    Message 1 of 12 , Jan 1, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi Folks,

      Drew Smith
      >Whether or not particular scientists feel the need to comment about Mirecki's assault case is
      >unrelated to that debate, and criticizing those scientists is ad hominem.

      No, criticizing those evolutionists for not speaking on the Mirecki assault case
      might be off-topic (although I don't really see that, just like you could properly
      discuss Kent Hovind's views and tussles with the IRS) but it is not ad hominem.

      However, saying
      "those folks are duplicitous hypocrites, and look at how they don't discuss the Mirecki case"
      would be an ad hominem, even if true.

      >Schmuel wrote: "In terms of ad hominem, sometimes a man's background, history, lack of credentials or lack of integrity can properly be one factor, even a major or primary factor, in evaluating the strength or accuracy of his claims, or in determining whether they are worthy of due
      >consideration."

      Drew
      >Unless a claim consists only of witness testimony, it is ad hominem to take
      >any notice of the claimer's background, history, credentials, or integrity.

      Schmuel
      This makes no sense at all. Credentials and background are frequently germane
      to evaluation of statements.

      To put it bluntly, I think you are totally clueless in this whole area,
      and unless you get corrected by some evos this will go on and on and on.

      So you take the likely last words, and let's see if any of the evos have the werewithal
      to try to teach you and reach you. On this forum, with one exception, very unlikely.

      Shalom,
      Steven Avery
      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Messianic_Apologetic
    • Drew Smith
      I wrote: Whether or not particular scientists feel the need to comment about Mirecki s assault case is unrelated to that debate, and criticizing those
      Message 2 of 12 , Jan 1, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        I wrote: "Whether or not particular scientists feel the need to comment
        about Mirecki's assault case is unrelated to that debate, and criticizing
        those scientists is ad hominem."

        Schmuel wrote: "No, criticizing those evolutionists for not speaking on the
        Mirecki assault case might be off-topic"

        It is indeed off-topic. It's *also* ad hominem, because it criticizes the
        scientists themselves, rather than their arguments regarding evolution.

        ***

        Schmuel wrote: "In terms of ad hominem, sometimes a man's background,
        history, lack of credentials or lack of integrity can properly be one
        factor, even a major or primary factor, in evaluating the strength or
        accuracy of his claims, or in determining whether they are worthy of due
        consideration."

        I responded: "Unless a claim consists only of witness testimony, it is ad
        hominem to take any notice of the claimer's background, history,
        credentials, or integrity. For instance, in a court of law, it is
        acceptable to address the skills or integrity of an eyewitness who is
        testifying as to what he heard or saw, and it is acceptable to address the
        skills or integrity of an expert witness who is testifying as to his
        professional analysis of the evidence. But we are dealing with none of
        those kinds of testimony here, and therefore, the ad hominem remarks are
        fallacious."

        Schmuel wrote: "This makes no sense at all. Credentials and background are
        frequently germane to evaluation of statements."

        Credentials and background aren't the least germane to evaluating an
        *argument*. Again, we are not talking about statements of *testimony*. If
        you believe otherwise, provide an example.

        Drew Smith
      • Schmuel
        Hi Folks, ... You know, I always want to have sympathy for somebody who may have been attacked wrongly, violently, in any way. Had never heard of Mirecki
        Message 3 of 12 , Jan 2, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          Hi Folks,

          Morrowitz@... wrote:
          >> Yet strangely the good "professor" has done nothing to aid in "finding the attackers". His information to the Sheriff apparently couldn't identify what road he was on, what time it was, the license plate number, and specific description. Now isn't this odd? ... Why isn't there a "composite sketch", why is "the good professor" sitting in stone silence?

          You know, I always want to have sympathy for somebody who may have been attacked wrongly, violently, in any way. Had never heard of Mirecki before, apparently he is an Elaine Pagels type gnostic/atheist combo or something, active in the Kansas ID wars.

          Well, I haven't kept up on this story, but I will mention that when I first read the article, I think in the NY Times, about the attack, it seemed a bit fishy, a bit too convenient, and unclear.

          Just checking now..

          This goes back over 3 weeks
          WHAT HAPPENED TO PAUL MIRECKI? By Michelle Malkin ·
          http://michellemalkin.com/archives/004037.htm

          http://sean.gleeson.us/2005/12/07/kansas-bigot-invents-crazy-attack-story
          .....The Douglas County Sheriff’s office is asking for the public’s help in finding the suspects. So if you know two white fundamentalist Christian men between 30 and 40 with no features whatsover ­ no hair or eye color, no facial hair, no height or weight ­ who drive a colorless unbranded truck and have access to a metal object, please call Crime Stoppers at (785) 843-TIPS.

          Perhaps if he was running away from a marriage we would know a lot more...

          Mauled Mirecki Pic
          http://www2.ljworld.com/photos/2005/dec/10/70615/
          At first I thought it was a satire pic, but apparently it is the real thing.

          From my perspective one post is enough on this topic.

          Maybe some of the folks here want to invite Mirecki on forum.
          He should fit in quite well with this crew.

          Shalom,
          Steven Avery
          http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Messianic_Apologetic
        • Drew Smith
          Schmuel writes: You know, I always want to have sympathy for somebody who may have been attacked wrongly, violently, in any way. Had never heard of Mirecki
          Message 4 of 12 , Jan 2, 2006
          • 0 Attachment
            Schmuel writes: "You know, I always want to have sympathy for somebody who
            may have been attacked wrongly, violently, in any way. Had never heard of
            Mirecki before, apparently he is an Elaine Pagels type gnostic/atheist combo
            or something, active in the Kansas ID wars."

            Unless you're here to discuss a particular argument of Mirecki's regarding
            creationism or the theory of evolution, you're doing nothing more than
            engaging in ad hominem.

            Drew Smith
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.