Roger Bacon, the thirteenth-century scientist, is said to have made important discoveries in optics. ██ ███ ██ █████ ████████ ██ ████████ ████████████████ ███ ██ █ ███████ ██████ ███ ████████ ███████ ███████ ████████████ ██ ███ ████████ ██ ████████████ █████████████ ████ ███ ███ ████ █████ ███████ ████ █████████ ██ █████████ ████ ██ ███ █████████ ███ ███ ███ ██████████████ █████ ███████ ████ ██ ██████ ██████ ██ █████████ ████████████ ██ ████ ██ ███ █████████████ ███████ ███ ██████████ ███ ███ ███ █████████
The author concludes that Bacon’s work on optics should be disregarded, even though it’s generally respected. His reasoning is that Bacon appealed to authority to support his arguments, despite hypocritically warning others not to do so.
This is a cookie-cutter attacking the source of the argument (ad hominem) flaw. The author attacks the source of certain ideas about optics, without attacking the ideas themselves.
The reasoning in the argument ██ ██████ ███████ ███ ████████
presumes, without providing ██████████████ ████ █████████ ███████ ██ █████ █████████
attacks Bacon's uncritical ████████ ██ █████████ ███████
uses Bacon's remarks ██ ███ ████████ ██ ████████ ██ ███ ████████
ignores the fact ████ ██████████████████ ███████ ███ ███ ████ ██ ████ █████
criticizes Bacon's character ██ █████ ██ ████████ ███ ██████████ ████████