Denying rationality to the opposition is pretty much the definition of an 'ad hominem' attack.
There's a wonderful paper of the fundamental difference between the values of people who self-label as 'conservative' and those who self-label as 'liberal'. It has to do with how they prioritize values such as personal liberty, respect for institutions, adherence to authority etc. Both value them; but they prioritize them completely differently.
So, that aristotlean view above may call everything black and white, but actual people start from different premises. So they reach different conclusions.
Its good to respect other's culture including their premises on how we organize our society. Instead of just calling them idiots or that they have 'poor beliefs'. They just don't match yours.
Its good because you can understand them, and have a hope of arguing effectively with them. Instead of disaffecting them by calling them names. Which feels good for a moment, but just balls up any chances of a dialog.
There's a wonderful paper of the fundamental difference between the values of people who self-label as 'conservative' and those who self-label as 'liberal'. It has to do with how they prioritize values such as personal liberty, respect for institutions, adherence to authority etc. Both value them; but they prioritize them completely differently.
So, that aristotlean view above may call everything black and white, but actual people start from different premises. So they reach different conclusions.
Its good to respect other's culture including their premises on how we organize our society. Instead of just calling them idiots or that they have 'poor beliefs'. They just don't match yours.
Its good because you can understand them, and have a hope of arguing effectively with them. Instead of disaffecting them by calling them names. Which feels good for a moment, but just balls up any chances of a dialog.