Ad hominem attacks

"404 - User No Longer Available" (toni-cipriani) 06/27/2018 at 18:15 • Filed to: None

1

11

Pretty interesting article I came over at /r/philosophy.

They use political arguments as examples, but they seem to equally apply to trolls, fanboys and FP comments.

!!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!!

Just some interesting food for thought. Admittedly I sometimes fall into the said trap of using such fallacies, lol.

DC3 LS, Fuck Hyundai, now and forever > 404 - User No Longer Available 06/27/2018 at 18:28

2

Like I’m gonna listen to someone on a car blog who has an anime character as an avatar for logic and argument advice! SAD!

404 - User No Longer Available > DC3 LS, Fuck Hyundai, now and forever 06/27/2018 at 18:32

1

You're just testing the theory weren't ya, lol.

Chariotoflove > 404 - User No Longer Available 06/27/2018 at 18:36

8

It seems to be human nature to denigrate your opponent so that you can dismiss what he says as worthless.

Dismiss Reagan because he was getting senile.

Dismiss Clinton because he just a philanderer.

Dismiss Bush because he’s an uneducated dolt; he only got into an Ivy League school because he was a legacy.

Dismiss Obama because he’s not really an American and isn’t “one of us”.

Dismiss Trump because he’s a bigot/philanderer/bad businessman/rude/...

It didn’t matter whether any of these statements were on point or even true. And it’s generally used throughout political discourse these days (Republicans only care about lining their pockets and those of their cronies; Democrats just want to control us and make us live the way they want) . I think it’s why we can’t get anything done with our government.

Mercedes Streeter > 404 - User No Longer Available 06/27/2018 at 18:39

5

What about “ whataboutery”?

A few politicians really love using that time-tested tactic. :)

Berang > 404 - User No Longer Available 06/27/2018 at 18:41

1

I’ve always marveled at people who’ll on one hand say something like “don’t go to that Chinese restaurant, none of their chefs are Asian” but on the other hand say something like “Don’t assume he knows how to cook Chinese food because he’s Asian, that’s racist” as if they hadn’t before casually implied exactly that.

Which is of course all beside the point anyway if the subject is supposed to be “is the food good?” not “which chef best fits your prejudices?”.

fintail > Mercedes Streeter 06/27/2018 at 19:03

2

Not just politicos, but their base, too.

nermal > 404 - User No Longer Available 06/27/2018 at 19:12

2

Pfffft. You don’t know what you’re talking about, moran.

(Did I do that correctly?)

jimz > Mercedes Streeter 06/27/2018 at 19:14

3

I believe “whataboutism” depending on how it’s used can be considered a form of tu quoque (“ you too!”) fallacy. Sometimes also relative privation fallacy.

KingT- 60% of the time, it works every time > 404 - User No Longer Available 06/27/2018 at 19:52

4

Tristan > Chariotoflove 06/28/2018 at 00:16

1

You deserve all the stars.

dsigned001 - O.R.C. hunter > 404 - User No Longer Available 06/29/2018 at 19:34

0

I’ll do you one better. Instead of focusing on what not to do, take a page out of the counterfeit spotters (apocryphal) handbook: instead of worrying about bad logic, focus on what makes an argument good, and what sound reasoning looks like. A lot of times excellent thought will have fallacies peppered in, but won’t need them for the overarching lin e of reasoning to hold true. Studying fallacies isn’t nearly as good a way to learn this as studying good logic is.