Want to get notified of all questions as they are asked? Update your mail preferences and turn on "Instant Notification."
Hello! I am social psychologist and author, Bo Bennett. In this podcast, I take a critical thinking-, reason-, and science-based approach to issues that matter. As of January 2020, this podcast is a collection of topics related to all of my books. Subscribe today and enjoy!
|
Supporters of group B would be committing a textbook Ad Hominem (Circumstantial) IF they are implying that the claims are false because of the vendetta. We might be justified in saying that the vendetta accusation is a non-sequitur, but they may come back and say that it is very relevant to the argument since heavy bias could distort the "facts." This would be reasonable for group B. It really comes down to what is being implied; are they implying all the claims are false or should not be investigated, or that they are more likely to be false given the strong biases involved? If the former, it is fallacious. If the latter, perfectly reasonable. |
answered on Thursday, Aug 10, 2017 06:41:50 AM by Bo Bennett, PhD | |
Bo Bennett, PhD Suggested These Categories |
|
Comments |
|
|