Martin lambert

Indeed. I was thinking about this a fair bit this weekend. The only reasonable argument (though not necessarily a good one) for outing someone like this is if the person is in the role of a leader or representative (or internally within an advocacy group) … who is working to undermine the rights of others, not as an ad hominem but as an attempt…[Read more]

Haven’t we slipped a little off topic here? I liked the original poser, got another, anyone?

Unseen wrote:

Your dictionary definition in both cases are examples of very closely (if not indistinguishable) related fallacies (ad hominem and avoiding the question via personal attack) and have nothing to do with Unseen’s creative, original and personal idiosyncraticc definitions. Try again.

Saying it doesn’t make it so. I have already rep…

[Read more]

Your dictionary definition in both cases are examples of very closely (if not indistinguishable) related fallacies (ad hominem and avoiding the question via personal attack) and have nothing to do with Unseen’s creative, original and personal idiosyncraticc definitions. Try again.

Saying it doesn’t make it so. I have already replied to this charge.

Also, you call my defintion “idiosyncratic” whereas it is really merely a minority usage, but it is sanctioned by the dictionary.

Your dictionary definition in both cases are examples of very closely (if not indistinguishable) related fallacies (ad hominem and avoiding the question via personal attack) and have nothing to do with Unseen’s cre…[Read more]

Gallup’s Mirror wrote:It also doesn’t have to be an attack; it could be a compliment.

Of course.

You got the first one wrong. Just take off the conclusion part (“so…”) and you have it. It’s an attack on the person not what he says.

Without the explicit or implicit claim that the “attack” is relevant to the target’s position or the topic at hand there is no logical fallacy. It also doesn’t have to be an attack; it could be a complim…[Read more]

Strega wrote:The attack – Mike is an idiot so his opinion on global warming is idiotic and dismissable.

The fallacy – global warming isn’t real because Mike told me it was, and he’s an idiot. Is that right?

I failed to address these. You got the first one wrong. Just take off the conclusion part (“so…”) and you have it. It’s an attack on the…[Read more]

Strega wrote:I’m still a bit perplexed over ‘ad hominem fallacy”. Is that a rebuttal of such an attack? A fallacy is an untruth. Something that is believed in erroneously.

A fallacy isn’t an untruth, as you say, rather it’s a badly constructed or irrelevant argument.

As opposed to a formal fallacy (a badly constructed syllogism, for examp…[Read more]

@Unseen, so I can have an ad hominem dog bite? I know it’s an extreme, I’m using it to test your basis of definition.

I actually understand the term “ad hominem attack”. It’s when you attack the person rather than the subject matter. I think we’re all good with that, and it makes sense.

I’m still a bit perplexed over ‘ad hominem fallacy”. Is…[Read more]

Davis wrote:You have not directed us to any source that demonstrates that these two contrasting definitions of ad hominem fallacy andad hominem attack…are anything more than Unseen’s way of defining it.

Yeah, if you ignore the dictionary reference, which you’re obvio9usly willing to do in order to save your position. Otherwise, explain how the…[Read more]

Davis wrote:@Unseen. So when my dog greets me and jumps up, it’s an ad hominem greeting? When I get a birthday card, it’s an ad hominem message?

If the intent is an attack, otherwise no. That’s how ad hominem has come to be used. Either as referring to a fallacy on the one hand or an attack on the other.

Unseen wrote:

Strega wrote:
@Unseen, I get it despite the example you typed. I think it can be taken as read that you gave definitions that work for you. What is at question, is whether there exists a formal external definition, where we can all point to and agree.

However, defining “ad hominem” as literally anything opposing the person means tha…

[Read more]

@Unseen. So when my dog greets me and jumps up, it’s an ad hominem greeting? When I get a birthday card, it’s an ad hominem message?

Strega wrote:@Unseen, I get it despite the example you typed. I think it can be taken as read that you gave definitions that work for you. What is at question, is whether there exists a formal external definition, where we can all point to and agree.

However, defining “ad hominem” as literally anything opposing the person means that a punch on…

[Read more]

@Unseen, I get it despite the example you typed. I think it can be taken as read that you gave definitions that work for you. What is at question, is whether there exists a formal external definition, where we can all point to and agree.

However, defining “ad hominem” as literally anything opposing the person means that a punch on the nose…[Read more]