... you're offering an expaination as to why certain "type C" arguments are being made, in the face of presumably better, countervailing "type C" arguments that seem to be being disregarded or improperly dismissed.
Sometimes, the disregarded type C arguments are assumed, especially in a current or long on-going debate (eg the pros and cons of the Bush administration's economic, enviromental, social, and security policies).
So I would suggest that "type C" arguments have a valid and useful place in many discussions. Sometimes they will be relevent, sometimes they will be "ad hominem", and sometimes it will be a matter of opinion to which degree they are one or the other. |
