Difference between revisions of "Appeal to guilt"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(appeal to shame) |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | + | pYvIhf | |
| − | |||
| − | |||
==Validity== | ==Validity== | ||
The "appeal to guilt" is acceptable as a way of ''shaming'' an opponent into accepting an otherwise-valid argument when logic and reason have failed. Use of the "appeal to guilt" does not automatically invalidate the substance of the argument in which it is used; it is more of a signal that there may be unspoken assumptions which need to be examined more closely. | The "appeal to guilt" is acceptable as a way of ''shaming'' an opponent into accepting an otherwise-valid argument when logic and reason have failed. Use of the "appeal to guilt" does not automatically invalidate the substance of the argument in which it is used; it is more of a signal that there may be unspoken assumptions which need to be examined more closely. | ||
Revision as of 01:05, 15 July 2009
pYvIhf
Validity
The "appeal to guilt" is acceptable as a way of shaming an opponent into accepting an otherwise-valid argument when logic and reason have failed. Use of the "appeal to guilt" does not automatically invalidate the substance of the argument in which it is used; it is more of a signal that there may be unspoken assumptions which need to be examined more closely.