He was called a scientologist:
"I have finally been granted a meeting with Kent Woods, CEO of the MHRA to discuss the issue of withdrawal regarding Seroxat. I will tell you the date of the meeting much nearer the time. I will probably announce it a day before.
I choose to do this because of a rather insidious character who helps moderate, it seems, a mental health forum. It seems this person is either infatuated with me or has nothing better to do with his life.
A recent visit to his forum sees a discussion labelling me a 'Scientologist lover'"
Why do they use this accusation to put in disbelief serious people?
I believe this is the most terrible kind of defense when you have no other argument or refuse to have a good dialogue.
Schopenhauer on his book "The Art of Controversy" uses it as the last stratagem:
This is used when the person is afraid and I dare to say has no character.XXXVIII.
"A last trick is to become personal, insulting, rude, as soon as you perceive that your opponent has the upper hand, and that you are going to come off worst. It consists in passing from the subject of dispute, as from a lost game, to the disputant himself, and in some way attacking his person. It may be called the argumentum ad personam, to distinguish it from the argumentum ad hominem, which passes from the objective discussion of the subject pure and simple to the statements or admissions which your opponent has made in regard to it. But in becoming personal you leave the subject altogether, and turn your attack to his person, by remarks of an offensive and spiteful character. It is an appeal from the virtues of the intellect to the virtues of the body, or to mere animalism. This is a very popular trick, because every one is able to carry it into effect; and so it is of frequent application. Now the question is, What counter-trick avails for the other party? for if he has recourse to the same rule, there will be blows, or a duel, or an action for slander."
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment