Torne,Jomil Kevin M.

1-A
Student number 2017-120688
Legal Technique And Logic
Wednesday 5-7 PM
Finals

1. Argumentum Ad Hominem
Facts:
W filed petition for voiding her marriage with H on grounds on Aricle 36 of the
family code or the Grounds for Psychological Incapacity. She has been accusing of H of
being irresponsible in comes of their children, finances and other essentials of marriage.
In defense raised up an argument wherein he pointed out that W is the youngest of 3
sibblings, a spoiled brat, shopaholic, wakes up late in the afternoon and stay out all
night hanging around with her high school friends. He also stated that W didn’t even
finished her college degree due to her irresponsibility. So how could she accused
someone of irresponsibility if she herself was a perfect example of an irresponsible wife.
Explanation:
Argumentum Ad Hominem is one that is used to counter another argument, but it
is based on feelings of prejudice (often irrelevant to the argument), rather than facts,
reason or logic. It is often a personal attack on one’s character rather than an attempt to
address the issue at hand.
In the case, H attacked the credibility of W as a good wife and mother. He started
to pushed the statement that W is spoiled brat who didn’t know how to manage finances
and take care of their children. On the last statement, he pointed out that how can a bad
mother/wife complain of something that she herself is guilty of. The argument have no
direct attack on the case, rather attack the credibility of accuser.

2. Agumentum Ad Misericordian
Facts:
V filed a criminal complaint on R for grounds on theft. V stated that R stole her
purse while riding on a jeepney on quezon avenue corner scout boromeo on april 20
2018 around 9 am. R in defense cried and admitted his offense and stated that he is
desperate for his son and wife was hit and run by a truck 3 days. They are currently at
providence hospital ICU. He stated that both of them need to be in immediate brain
operation due to massive contusion on R parietal lobe for the mother and B frontal lobe
for the son. The brain surgery will cost roughly 3 million pesos and he is short of two
hundred thousand even thou he allready mortage and rush saled most of their property.
He is begging for forgiveness from V. He keeps on insisting that he should be let go for
his family needs him more than ever. And will do anything to make up for his crime on
V. V forgave the R and asked for dismissal of case. She even helped in asking
donations for the operation of V.
Explantion:
Emotion is the primary target of Argumentum ad misericordian. It is the fallacy
committed when pity or a related emotion such as sympathy or compassion is appealed
to for the sake of getting a conclusion accepted.
In the case, R pleaded for forgiveness to V for his actions. He explained the
reason for why he desperately did the crime. He used his desperation for both his wife
and son is in a dying situation if he cannot produce the money to be used for the
operation. He explained the situation of both and stated the amount he need in order to
save their lives who is at that time in a very critical situation. Lastly, he gained V’s
sympathy and made her make a decision not to push the case and even help him in his
dire needs.

3. Argumentum Terrorem
Facts:
A an ex-convict and a war veteran filed a case against B for killing C. B insisted
that it was a pure self defense for C entered their lot without authority and while carrying
knife. A claimed that C was carrying a knife because he was currently cooking and need
to buy at the sari-sari store. He forgot to leave his knife and used B’s lot as a shortcut to
the store. A claimed that whatever the reason or circumstances will be, taking a life is
never right and must be punished by both law of man and divine. If ever judges of man
do not punished such, they should be considered as an accessory to the crime and
must be as well be punished by man for they will be punished in hell. If the law will not
help them gain their justice, since he himself have commited murder in the past during
the wars, He will punish them himself including those “Who are accessory to the crime
and their family”. He will make their lives a living hell and would which to die rather than
suffer them.

Explantion:
Fear is the main factor in the argument. Argumentum Terrorem is the fallacy of
attempting to gain support for an idea by creating fear.
 In the case, A created an atmosphere fear and threat both on divine law and
human law. He stated that he will bring justice to those that have wrong them and those
who are accessory for such(the judges as stated in the cse if they will not side to them).
This kind of argument used in the case gave the other parties and the litigator a feeling
of fear for their lives and the lives of their love one. Now the question is “how will you
proceed if face in such”.

4.Argumentum ad Traditionem
Facts:
S, a migrant filed a complaint against F for using a videoke during their barrio
fiesta from sundown to sunrise on april 20-21,2018. S claimed that she wasn;t able to
study because of the the loud music and untune voices of the said party. She stated
that this is a big disturbance in the community and must be punished. In defense, F
stated that everyone in the barrio knows that April 20-21 is their barrio fiesta and such
parties are already expected since it was a part of their tradition in the community for
decades. She also claimed that the whole barrio itself, most if not all residence are
having loud celebrations. She didn’t understand what wrong she does for following their
traditional fiesta routine. She stated that how could a tradition for decade becomes
wrong for a complain of a migrant and at the same time why would majority adjust for
the sake of one.
Explanation:
Tradition is part of Pilipino society. This argument asserts that a premise must
be true because people have always believed it or done it.
In the case, the respondent defendant that what she is doing is right and proper
since most if not all in the community is doing such for it is something that they have
been doing every since the barrio fiesta started decades ago. Her argument is that ”
how could a tradition for decade becomes wrong for a a complain of a migrant and at
the same time why would majority adjust for the sake of one.”

5. Argument from Personal Incredulity

Facts:
C ,a lawyer, filed a case D, a doctor, for negligence on medical procedure done
to his wife which led to her death. C claimed that D is incapable and must not be
allowed to continue practice for he is a murderer. D defended himself and stated the
facts why c’s wife died. He stated that it was not because of the procedure but on other
disease that C and his wife didn’t disclose to him. He started to state different medical
terminologies and the process on how the wife died and at the same time how he did
the medical procedure with all the precautions taken. Suddenly, C said that he is not a
doctor to understand all those and all D’s statement doesn’t matter since none of them
are medical professional who knows and understand those.

Explanation:
I do not understand, thus that do not matter nor be considered. Argument from
personal incredulity is concluding that because you can't or refuse to believe something,
it must not be true, improbable, or the argument must be flawed.
In the case, difference between profession made a gap between knowledge. C
don’t want to believe D for he doesn’t understand what D stated. The argument is
simple, “my ignorance on something, will excuse me for believing or using such”.