Fallacy: Circumstantial Ad Hominem
A Circumstantial ad Hominem is a fallacy in which one attempts to
attack a claim by asserting that the person making the claim is making
it simply out of self interest. In some cases, this fallacy involves
substituting an attack on a person's circumstances (such as the person's
religion, political affiliation, ethnic background, etc.). The fallacy
has the following forms:
A Circumstantial ad Hominem is a fallacy because a person's interests
and circumstances have no bearing on the truth or falsity of the claim
being made. While a person's interests will provide them with motives to
support certain claims, the claims stand or fall on their own. It is
also the case that a person's circumstances (religion, political
affiliation, etc.) do not affect the truth or falsity of the claim. This
is made quite clear by the following example: "Bill claims that
1+1=2. But he is a Republican, so his claim is false."
There are times when it is prudent to suspicious of a person's
claims, such as when it is evident that the claims are being biased by
the person's interests. For example, if a tobacco company
representative claims that tobacco does not cause cancer, it would be
prudent to not simply accept the claim. This is because the person has a
motivation to make the claim, whether it is true or not. However, the
mere fact that the person has a motivation to make the claim does not
make it false. For example, suppose a parent tells her son that
sticking a fork in a light socket would be dangerous. Simply because she
has a motivation to say this obviously does not make her claim false.
[
Previous
|
Index
|
Next
]
Description of Circumstantial Ad Hominem
Examples of Circumstantial Ad Hominem