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

Re: [mythsoc] Re: Christopher Hitchens on G.K.C.

Expand Messages
  • Mike Foster
    Chesterton: “An argument is ruined by turning it into a quarrel.” That said, Travis makes good points. There’s more any and each of us than a single
    Message 1 of 22 , Mar 14, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      Chesterton: “An argument is ruined by turning it into a quarrel.”
       
      That said, Travis makes good points.  There’s more any and each of us than a single page can hold.
       
      Mike
       
      Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2012 8:43 AM
      Subject: Re: [mythsoc] Re: Christopher Hitchens on G.K.C.
       
       

      Wendell,


      I disagree that I was misusing the term 'ad hominem'. You wrote that 'I think you ought to read the writings of more authors and not confine yourself to just ones you've already decided are perfect and unchallengeable'. You impugn my character when you accuse me of narrow reading, of confining myself to only authors whom I have 'already decided are perfect and unchallengeable'. Based on a few scant comments on GKC, how could you derive such conclusive knowledge of my reading habits? How is that comment based on my argumentation? To my mind, a person who does that--reads only authors they have beforehand decided are 'perfect and unchallengeable'--lacks certain desirable qualities one would wish in a whole reader and thinker, that is, in a whole person. I took offense at the personal implication which went well beyond any argumentation offered by me to a speculative assumption presented as fact by you and broadcasted to the entire list about my reading and thinking habits, which are not incidental to my character. Please don't misunderstand: I am not upset about it--I haven't even thought since about it until your e-mail today. But please do me the courtesy of calling a spade a spade. I would appreciate it more if you would own up to what you said instead of giving me a lesson on the meaning of 'ad hominem'.

      Travis





      On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 1:23 PM, <WendellWag@...> wrote:
       

      You're misusing the term "ad hominem."  An ad hominem attack is one where you question the character of the person you're arguing with.  I never discussed Travis Buck's character.  I may disagree with his argumentation or the facts he cites, but I have nothing to say about his character.
       
      Wendell Wagner
       
      In a message dated 3/2/2012 9:44:25 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, jef.murray@... writes:
      And, regarding Wendell, I won't dignify his wild ad hominem attacks
      on people he doesn't even know with any further response.
       
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.