Anonymous Coward User ID: 6801463 United Kingdom 02/11/2012 05:05 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | THE AD HOMINEM FALLACY FALLACY [ link to plover.net] One of the most widely misused terms on the Net is "ad hominem". It is most often introduced into a discussion by certain delicate types, delicate of personality and mind, whenever their opponents resort to a bit of sarcasm. As soon as the suspicion of an insult appears, they summon the angels of ad hominem to smite down their foes, before ascending to argument heaven in a blaze of sanctimonious glory. They may not have much up top, but by God, they don't need it when they've got ad hominem on their side. It's the secret weapon that delivers them from any argument unscathed. In reality, ad hominem is unrelated to sarcasm or personal abuse. Argumentum ad hominem is the logical fallacy of attempting to undermine a speaker's argument by attacking the speaker instead of addressing the argument. The mere presence of a personal attack does not indicate ad hominem: the attack must be used for the purpose of undermining the argument, or otherwise the logical fallacy isn't there. It is not a logical fallacy to attack someone; the fallacy comes from assuming that a personal attack is also necessarily an attack on that person's arguments. Therefore, if you can't demonstrate that your opponent is trying to counter your argument by attacking you, you can't demonstrate that he is resorting to ad hominem. If your opponent's sarcasm is not an attempt to counter your argument, but merely an attempt to insult you (or amuse the bystanders), then it is not part of an ad hominem argument. Actual instances of argumentum ad hominem are relatively rare. Ironically, the fallacy is most often committed by those who accuse their opponents of ad hominem, since they try to dismiss the opposition not by engaging with their arguments, but by claiming that they resort to personal attacks. Those who are quick to squeal "ad hominem" are often guilty of several other logical fallacies, including one of the worst of all: the fallacious belief that introducing an impressive-sounding Latin term somehow gives one the decisive edge in an argument. But enough vagueness. The point of this article is to bury the reader under an avalanche of examples of correct and incorrect usage of ad hominem, in the hope that once the avalanche has passed, the term will never be used incorrectly again. <snip> Rest at link. [ link to plover.net] |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 8665212 United States 02/11/2012 05:24 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Re: THE AD HOMINEM FALLACY FALLACY Good post, OP. And quite so.
If a personal attack is used against an individual in a manner other than to discredit the argument, then it is simply a tactic of distraction. They are attempting to distract from the act of debating itself by turning it into a personal character defense action, not a debate action...In other words, distract the poster from continuing the argument by forcing them to take up all the time they would otherwise spend on debating and making their argument in defending themselves and their character. This is the most often used incorrect application of the term "ad hominem." |