'The Personal Attack: The Logical Fallacy of Argumentum\r'

'The term â€Å"ad hominem” is a Latin phrase that translates to â€Å"against the man” (â€Å"Ad hominem”).  It is iodine of several logical fallacies that may appear (intentionally or otherwise) in the rhetorical mode of writing or speaking known as Argument.  The use of the ad hominem indicates that an melodic line (or counter-argument) is focusing not on the depicted object or cause, but on the fall out’s donor, and it generally takes the form of a personal round out of the sponsor’s character (â€Å"Introduction to Ad Hominem Fallacies”).\r\nThe soundest ad hominem attacks are made up of 2 steps.  The first step is to discredit the speaker/presenter/sponsor, and the second step is to imply that because the speaker/presenter/sponsor is a â€Å"bad” person, the issue or cause must be bad as well (â€Å"Introduction to Ad Hominem Fallacies”).\r\nFor example, prior to the stopping hint local election, I atten ded a meditate between two city council prognosiss regarding a universal shoal bond measure.  Having read about the issue, I was aware that the facts proved the bond’s woo would far outweigh the anticipated minimal benefitsâ€benefits that had not been shown to occur in similar communities.  I had seen no evidence to support any logical argument to encourage citizen’s to support the bond issue, so I was not surprised when one candidate turned the factual debate into a personal attack of his inverse.\r\nThe argument: that his opponent had no check-aged children and because of this, his opponent has no vested interest in the success or failure of the community’s public rail system. Obviously the candidate who was attacking his opponent (via the ad hominem) hoped that people would equate his opponent’s missing school-aged children with an in baron to assess a public school bond issue properly.\r\nThe logical counter to this double-faced arg ument would be to return the focus to the facts: if passed, would the school bond result in improvements or would it not?  If passed, would the costs of the school bond be outlay the benefits or not?  I would quickly point out that whether or not one has children has no bearing on one’s ability to assess the fiscal impact of a stria of facts, and I would add to that, that if this were a logical supposition, that nevertheless those who had children should be allowed to vote on the bond issue as obviously only those with children have the cleverness to make a sound decision in this area.\r\nReferences\r\nAd hominem.  (2000).  In The American heritage vocabulary of the English language (4th ed.).  Boston: Houghton Mifflin.\r\nIntroduction to ad hominem fallacies.  (n.d.).  Mission Critical.  Retrieved October 17, 2006, from http://www.sjsu.edu/depts/itl/graphics/adhom/adhom.html\r\n'