Quote:
Originally posted by FastShark85
Re-read my responses. I've not contested the study nor have I invalidated it. My response about winsecure was simply to cut him some slack. It's understandable that someone could assume that Berkeley is a liberal institution.
|
I never said you did. I said that any assumption that a study was invalid simply because of its source is flawed and faulty reasoning. Winsecure, however, did make that mistake - and I don't find it "understandable" at all.
Quote:
|
As far as understanding what an ad hominem attack is, I can suggest to you that I understand its roots, specifically, its true Latin translation.
|
Argumentum ad hominem: "Argument against the man." Literally, attacking the source of the argument instead of the argument itself. And it's rather ironic that Winsecure really did offer an
argumentum ad scholam (though my grammar's probably a bit off).
Quote:
|
Linguam annis quattor studebam.
|
That's cool; I preferred to devote my own linguistic study to "living" languages. French, German, and Russian specifically. But I can understand Latin well enough for a non-lawyer, non-doctor.