Difference between revisions of "Argument/attack"
(Redirected page to Argument/attacker) |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | + | ==About== | |
| + | An '''attack''' on an [[../|argument]] is anything which appears to damage the argument's credibility. The essence of an attack can be either [[rational]] or non-rational. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Rationally, the only valid attack on an argument is one which shows flaws in either the {{l/same|premise}}s or the {{l/same|logic}} connecting those premises to the argument's {{l/same|conclusion}}. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Non-rational forms of attack either attempt to engage the emotions of others in order to bypass logic ([[appeal to emotion]]), or to employ distortions of logic ([[logical fallacy]]) which may convince others to accept illogical conclusions. Typically, these two are used in tandem: a logical fallacy provides a cover of reasonableness for a conclusion which the listener has already been primed to want to believe. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Rather than attack an argument directly, an attacker may attempt to draw attention away from its conclusion via other means (the non-argument forms of [[rhetorical deception]], which should probably be categorized as [[rhetorical distraction]]). | ||
| + | ==Related== | ||
| + | * Someone who {{l/same|attack}}s an [[../|argument]] is referred to as an {{l/same|attacker}}. | ||
Revision as of 12:41, 8 May 2016
About
An attack on an argument is anything which appears to damage the argument's credibility. The essence of an attack can be either rational or non-rational.
Rationally, the only valid attack on an argument is one which shows flaws in either the premises or the logic connecting those premises to the argument's conclusion.
Non-rational forms of attack either attempt to engage the emotions of others in order to bypass logic (appeal to emotion), or to employ distortions of logic (logical fallacy) which may convince others to accept illogical conclusions. Typically, these two are used in tandem: a logical fallacy provides a cover of reasonableness for a conclusion which the listener has already been primed to want to believe.
Rather than attack an argument directly, an attacker may attempt to draw attention away from its conclusion via other means (the non-argument forms of rhetorical deception, which should probably be categorized as rhetorical distraction).