|
I would add the "ad hominem circumstantial" fallacy, which I would consider clear and distinct [wow, too much French philosophy] from the more general "insulting" ad hominem argument.
The circumstantial fallacy is of the ilk: "Of course George Bush is pro-life: he's a Christian."
Translation: "Christians are predisposed to hold pro-life views, so we can disregard a Christian's arguments on this subject."
This is just one other fallacious way to counter someone's argument, albeit in a slightly different way than outright insulting your opponent.
Very nice list, though: I wish everyone was as well-versed on this subject as Elphaba.
|