316 THE SCIENCE OF LOGIC 



interest, discussions in books and periodicals, whether on theology, 

 philosophy, science, art, literature, etc. furnish an unfailing sup 

 ply of examples. It is a favourite device with those who have to 

 support a weak cause. The attorney for a defendant is said to 

 have handed the barrister his brief marked &quot; No case ; abuse the 

 plaintiff s attorney &quot;. Discussions on topics of great and urgent 

 practical importance religious, ethical, social, political, educa 

 tional, administrative, etc. naturally stir up deep and strong per 

 sonal feeling ; and hence they tend to stray from a calm, impartial 

 consideration of the merits of the question, and to confuse the 

 issues by irrelevant personalities and recriminations. Such dis 

 plays offend not merely against the requirements of courtesy and 

 good taste, but also against the canons of logic, as being instances 

 of fallacious reasoning of ignoratio elenchi. They will be duly 

 discounted by those who can recognize them for what they really 

 are : substitutes for real argument, betrayals of weakness or defeat. 

 The writer or speaker who is clearly conscious of holding a 

 well-reasoned position can afford to be calm, courteous, patient, 

 provided he is addressing intelligent people ; but if he wants to 

 carry the crowd against the demagogue, he cannot afford to despise 

 the power of rhetoric, or to dispense with the art of oratory. 



There are many minor forms of the fallacy. The argumentum 

 ad baculum is an appeal to physical force. The argumentum ad 

 populum, or &quot; appeal to the gallery,&quot; for the purpose of exciting 

 the feelings, or arousing the passions, of the crowd, is the favourite 

 device of the mob-orator. The argumentum ad ignorantiam is 

 the fallacious reasoning that is made to pass muster owing to the 

 ignorance of those to whom it is addressed. The argumen 

 tum ad verecundiam is an appeal to the people s veneration for 

 authority, in matters that should be decided by reason, and on 

 their own merits. The appeal ad misericordiam is any argument 

 to show that a person deserves pity, when proof of his innocence is 

 demanded. Socrates refused to have recourse to it, though urged 

 by his friends to do so, when condemned to death by his judges. 



The argumentum adhominem, or &quot; tu quoque&quot; style of argument, 

 is a fairly common form of the ignoratio elenchi ; it includes such 

 practices as personal abuse, recrimination, charges of inconsistency, 

 etc. If the personal character of one party is relevant to the 

 trustworthiness of his allegations, it will not, of course, be ignoratio 

 elenchi on the part of the other party to impeach the former s 

 veracity. In cross-examination, a counsel can lawfully shake the 



