| Arguments
from popular opinion have long been regarded with suspicion, and in
most logic textbooks the ad populum argument is classified as a fallacy.
Douglas Walton now asks whether this negative evaluation is always
justified, particularly in a democratic system where decisions are
based on majority opinion.
In this insightful book, Walton maintains that there is a genuine
type of argumentation based on commonly accepted opinions and presumptions
that should represent a standard of rational decision-making on
important issues, especially those of a personal and political nature.
He shows how to judge arguments based on appeals to popular opinion
in a more balanced way, identifying eleven subtypes of the ad populum
argument and providing a pragmatic method to evaluate each of these
types.
Walton has examined dozens of logic texts and drawn on a wide range
of literature to reveal the many uses and misuses of popular opinion.
He contrasts the traditional discussion of ad populum in Greek rhetoric
with recent textbook treatment, then contrasts these contemporary
views with his own dialectical perspective in order to clarify often
confused appeals to prejudice and appeals to common knowledge.
Although appeal to popular opinion has long been a powerful argumentative
tactic, this is the first book to systematically describe and evaluate
it as a well-defined type of argument with its own special characteristics.
It enables us to deal with these often deceptive arguments in a
critically balanced way and makes an original contribution to an
important strand of rhetoric. |