Author Topic: Argumentum Ad Hominem (Read 643 times)

FUNKED1 · « **on:** August 15, 2006, 01:36:07 PM »

Seems we need a sticky thread explaining this fallacy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

Masherbrum · « **Reply #1 on:** August 15, 2006, 01:50:27 PM »

A "new found" term that will be used "Ad Nauseaum". No clicky on linky required.

Yeager · « **Reply #2 on:** August 15, 2006, 01:53:26 PM »

I saw an opportunity to make a point, but decided to pass on it when I realized there wasn't any point in making a point

T0J0 · « **Reply #3 on:** August 15, 2006, 02:04:08 PM »

The fact your from CA funked pretty much negates your WIKI link

Did I word that right??

TJ

FUNKED1 · « **Reply #4 on:** August 15, 2006, 03:13:15 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Masherbrum
A "new found" term that will be used "Ad Nauseaum". No clicky on linky required.

Dude it's Latin. It dates back hundreds if not thousands of years.

FUNKED1 · « **Reply #5 on:** August 15, 2006, 03:13:49 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by T0J0
The fact your from CA funked pretty much negates your WIKI link

Did I word that right??

TJ

That was perfect argumentum ad hominem, WTG.

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #6 on:** August 15, 2006, 06:34:59 PM »

Dont think for a second that this BS will cover the fact that you're a teachers union card carrying commie and arent worth listening to.

Do I get an A+?

Holden McGroin · « **Reply #7 on:** August 15, 2006, 06:43:26 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Do I get an A+?

Not without proper use of the apostrophe....

lukster · « **Reply #8 on:** August 15, 2006, 06:47:09 PM »

Just because George Bush can't speak and may make poor decisions makes him a bad president.

^
|
|
|

What about this one?

lukster · « **Reply #9 on:** August 15, 2006, 06:51:02 PM »

Here's one I'm sure of:

Ann Coulter is an idiot because she has an adams apple.

FUNKED1 · « **Reply #10 on:** August 15, 2006, 06:56:13 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by lukster
Just because George Bush can't speak and may make poor decisions makes him a bad president.

^
|
|
|

What about this one?

That one doesn't work because public speaking and decision making are part of the job description of President. However if you were arguing with George over the merits of Ted Williams versus Joe DiMaggio, and you brought up his disastrous presidency, that would be argumentum ad hominem.

lukster · « **Reply #11 on:** August 15, 2006, 07:29:03 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by FUNKED1
That one doesn't work because public speaking and decision making are part of the job description of President. However if you were arguing with George over the merits of Ted Williams versus Joe DiMaggio, and you brought up his disastrous presidency, that would be argumentum ad hominem.

So, interpretation is a factor?

Toad · « **Reply #12 on:** August 15, 2006, 07:53:55 PM »

Don't forget to highlight that it is a logical fallacy; a flaw in the structure of a deductive argument which renders the argument invalid.

They are not necessarily the type of "attack" on someone that goes beyond the bounds of good taste.

john9001 · « **Reply #13 on:** August 15, 2006, 08:04:41 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by FUNKED1
that would be argumentum ad hominem.

i must call rule 16 (speak english)

but in doing so i have broken rule 6 ( no back seat monitors)

damm , i kant win, yous collage boys is jus too smart fer me.

lukster · « **Reply #14 on:** August 15, 2006, 08:06:45 PM »

My bottom line, no argument is a success unless it achieves it's goal. Sometimes that might be only to provoke.