Which kind of logical fallacy is this?

A blogger writes of the artisanal movement that it is born out of a preference for things that are hand made. He points out (presumably as a criticism of this) that in the 16th century a gentleman would distance himself from manual industry. He later avers that "...it is as if we now believe artisans are 'free range', happier in their work, and more likely to deliver quality," and that he is mystified as to what this "dangerous assumption" means.

Nevermind the slipperiness of calling it the artisanal "movement", but what is it called when you use an out-dated (from the 16th century!) example to refute a position?

And is his final comment a straw man argument, positing something superficial, general and easy to mock that his opponents (cleverly disguised as "we") supposedly believe? Or just an example of a 'dangerous assumption' on his own part?

Apologies in advance if this is covered elsewhere.

Solution 1:

It would be argumentum ad antiquam if the author intended that the opinions of people of the 16th century should weigh more than those of contemporaries. If instead the author is instead drawing attention to the fact that a preference for artisan goods might be current fad (by citing a contrary opinion from the past), I see no fallacy.