From: Hermit (virus@hermit.net)
Date: Mon Sep 29 2003 - 13:11:34 MDT
Kalkor,
Any fallacy has to be based on the fact that the underlying information is not accurate and relevant or that an argument is unsound or not compelling.
As academia works on the basis of consensus, the number of academics accepting a work is relevent. As the author in question complains on his own site, that academia rejects him - and quotes the "person whom, to be insulted by, is a compliment" (so presumably the reverse should also apply)“There are few more valuable thinkers in Britain – or indeed, the world – today. His vilification and rejection by the academic establishment is disgraceful. In comparison with him, most of his critics are intellectual pygmies. Both left and right should be grateful to have such a man to sharpen and define the issues. And philosophers should be grateful that he has placed their subject at the very centre of current affairs. Perhaps Scruton’s greatest contribution is his living demonstration of the truth that without philosophy we are nothing.” Bryan Appleyard, The Sunday Times
See also the hate-site linked to this site by Clive Bates of ASH http://www.rogerscruton.com/rs-cv.html
So his rejection not being in question, and the number rejecting him being relevent, I don't think that argumentum ad populam applies.
Hermit
---- This message was posted by Hermit to the Virus 2003 board on Church of Virus BBS. <http://virus.lucifer.com/bbs/index.php?board=54;action=display;threadid=29368> --- To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Sep 29 2003 - 13:11:53 MDT