(urth) Academic commentary

[Andrew Mason]

Thomas Bitterman wrote:

> It is not legitimate.  It is a logical fallacy to judge the validity
> of an argument by referring to the motivations of the person who makes
> the argument.

That is a fallacy, without question. However, I remain unconvinced
that anyone here is doing it. If someone were to argue 'Wright has
such and such motives; therefore he is wrong', that would be
fallacious. But what I think people are actually saying is 'Wright is
wrong' (for reasons that have been extensively discussed over a period
of years - they don't convince everyone, but they exist). 'Now, how
can we explain his coming to this wrong conclusion?' At this point
motives become relevant.