On: ‘Making a Murderer’ Left Out Crucial Facts, Prosec...

[mgr86]

It is very tough to resist making an ad hominem attack on Ken Kratz.

[rhizome → mgr86]

Ad hominem doesn't invalidate an argument, it speaks to credibility.

[foxhill → rhizome]

and credibility seeks proof through authority, i.e not a proof at all.

ad hominems have no place in rational debate.

[rodgerd → foxhill]

Credibility has direct relevance to testimony, amongst other things.

I know this may shock you, but there's a world beyond high school debating.

[dang → rodgerd]

> I know this may shock you, but there's a world beyond high school debating

Please don't make acerbic swipes in HN comments. Your comment would be a fine one without that second sentence.

[foxhill → rodgerd]

credibility may help persuade belief in a statement one way or an other, but a court of law is (ostensibly) based on purely objective fact.

i know this may shock you, but denigrating people who you do not agree with is something only people in high school typically do.

[gohrt → foxhill]

and credibility has no place in a rational debate, but the courts rely on it heavily.

[GalacticDomin8r → gohrt]

Credibility does have a place, it's just frequently too high a place by the credulous.

[imtringued → gohrt]

Is there even an alternative to that except mass surveillance?