Total Posts:128|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

This SERIOUSLY needs to stop

Zarroette
Posts: 2,951
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/14/2014 2:13:38 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
I've had just about all I can take with the recent influx of Ad Hominem attacks in the forums. Some people just don't understand what Ad Hominem is, and so, I'm going to help everyone by explaining it to people, in hope that it stops.

Ad hominem attacks can take the form of overtly attacking somebody, or more subtly casting doubt on their character or personal attributes as a way to discredit their argument [1].

1. Ad Hominem is NOT a personal attack.

2. Ad Hominem is NOT sufficient in place of reasoning, when it comes to arguing.

3. Ad Hominem is NEVER justifiable.

I've been watching QandA recently, and watched a classic example of Ad Hominem, said by Lisa Wilkinson at around 0:38:

https://www.youtube.com...

And you know? She got cheers for this mindless attack. I've seen EXACTLY THE SAME happen on DDO. It's not to be tolerated. Is it to be shamed, and people are to be called on it, when it is committed.

Even the great Christopher Hitchens was not exempt from this, as charming as he was. Watch from 3:06 onwards, to around 3:33. Listen to all the ridiculous attacking of each other; it's just wasting everyone's time. "An Englishman has to be quiet when an Irishman talks", is just about the most ridiculously stupid thing I've ever heard (although. it was said by the other guy). I mean that fat, dumb Christian is literally saying that Hitchen's arguments are inferior and should not be heard over his own, simply because Christopher is English, and he is Irish.

https://www.youtube.com...

I'm going to be referring everyone to this thread, or at least a link, when I see these kinds of attacks, again. I will also shame anyone who makes them, if the person refuses to be reasonable. This cannot go on.

[1] https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com...
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/14/2014 4:06:55 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/14/2014 2:13:38 AM, Zarroette wrote:
I've had just about all I can take with the recent influx of Ad Hominem attacks in the forums. Some people just don't understand what Ad Hominem is, and so, I'm going to help everyone by explaining it to people, in hope that it stops.

Ad hominem attacks can take the form of overtly attacking somebody, or more subtly casting doubt on their character or personal attributes as a way to discredit their argument [1].

1. Ad Hominem is NOT a personal attack.

I would simply add that ad hominem is NOT ONLY a personal attack.

All personal attacks are ad hominem, but not all ad hominem are personal attacks.

2. Ad Hominem is NOT sufficient in place of reasoning, when it comes to arguing.

IMHO I would probably make an exception for expert testimony.

3. Ad Hominem is NEVER justifiable.

I've been watching QandA recently, and watched a classic example of Ad Hominem, said by Lisa Wilkinson at around 0:38:

https://www.youtube.com...

And you know? She got cheers for this mindless attack. I've seen EXACTLY THE SAME happen on DDO. It's not to be tolerated. Is it to be shamed, and people are to be called on it, when it is committed.

Even the great Christopher Hitchens was not exempt from this, as charming as he was. Watch from 3:06 onwards, to around 3:33. Listen to all the ridiculous attacking of each other; it's just wasting everyone's time. "An Englishman has to be quiet when an Irishman talks", is just about the most ridiculously stupid thing I've ever heard (although. it was said by the other guy). I mean that fat, dumb Christian is literally saying that Hitchen's arguments are inferior and should not be heard over his own, simply because Christopher is English, and he is Irish.

https://www.youtube.com...

I'm going to be referring everyone to this thread, or at least a link, when I see these kinds of attacks, again. I will also shame anyone who makes them, if the person refuses to be reasonable. This cannot go on.


[1] https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com...
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
Zarroette
Posts: 2,951
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/14/2014 4:15:08 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/14/2014 4:06:55 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 3/14/2014 2:13:38 AM, Zarroette wrote:
I've had just about all I can take with the recent influx of Ad Hominem attacks in the forums. Some people just don't understand what Ad Hominem is, and so, I'm going to help everyone by explaining it to people, in hope that it stops.

Ad hominem attacks can take the form of overtly attacking somebody, or more subtly casting doubt on their character or personal attributes as a way to discredit their argument [1].

1. Ad Hominem is NOT a personal attack.

I would simply add that ad hominem is NOT ONLY a personal attack.

All personal attacks are ad hominem, but not all ad hominem are personal attacks.

Yes, you've made my point better than I have. I should have thought about what I was going to write, instead of writing stream-of-conscious.


2. Ad Hominem is NOT sufficient in place of reasoning, when it comes to arguing.

IMHO I would probably make an exception for expert testimony.

Still, the arguments need to be there. It's highly likely that the expert is right, but it's not an assured thing. THAT'S why it's a fallacy.


3. Ad Hominem is NEVER justifiable.

I've been watching QandA recently, and watched a classic example of Ad Hominem, said by Lisa Wilkinson at around 0:38:

https://www.youtube.com...

And you know? She got cheers for this mindless attack. I've seen EXACTLY THE SAME happen on DDO. It's not to be tolerated. Is it to be shamed, and people are to be called on it, when it is committed.

Even the great Christopher Hitchens was not exempt from this, as charming as he was. Watch from 3:06 onwards, to around 3:33. Listen to all the ridiculous attacking of each other; it's just wasting everyone's time. "An Englishman has to be quiet when an Irishman talks", is just about the most ridiculously stupid thing I've ever heard (although. it was said by the other guy). I mean that fat, dumb Christian is literally saying that Hitchen's arguments are inferior and should not be heard over his own, simply because Christopher is English, and he is Irish.

https://www.youtube.com...

I'm going to be referring everyone to this thread, or at least a link, when I see these kinds of attacks, again. I will also shame anyone who makes them, if the person refuses to be reasonable. This cannot go on.


[1] https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com...
Zarroette
Posts: 2,951
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/14/2014 5:36:21 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/14/2014 4:44:27 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
You call me "troll" as an ad hom...

No, it isn't. I've looked at your trollish behaviour, and concluded based on that, that you are a troll. I once listened to what you had to say, but now that I've confirmed that you're a troll, I no longer want to talk to you.

Your arguments could still be valid, it's just that many are provably not, and since my time is limited, it could be spent better elsewhere.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/14/2014 8:20:55 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/14/2014 5:36:21 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 3/14/2014 4:44:27 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
You call me "troll" as an ad hom...

No, it isn't. I've looked at your trollish behaviour, and concluded based on that, that you are a troll. I once listened to what you had to say, but now that I've confirmed that you're a troll, I no longer want to talk to you.

Your arguments could still be valid, it's just that many are provably not, and since my time is limited, it could be spent better elsewhere.

Sounds like you are breaking your third rule:
Andoc is a troll therefore I will not respond to his argument.

Since Andoc is a troll (ad hom), you use this as justification to ignore any relevant point he has.
My work here is, finally, done.
Zarroette
Posts: 2,951
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/14/2014 8:27:18 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/14/2014 8:20:55 AM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/14/2014 5:36:21 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 3/14/2014 4:44:27 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
You call me "troll" as an ad hom...

No, it isn't. I've looked at your trollish behaviour, and concluded based on that, that you are a troll. I once listened to what you had to say, but now that I've confirmed that you're a troll, I no longer want to talk to you.

Your arguments could still be valid, it's just that many are provably not, and since my time is limited, it could be spent better elsewhere.

Sounds like you are breaking your third rule:
Andoc is a troll therefore I will not respond to his argument.

Since Andoc is a troll (ad hom), you use this as justification to ignore any relevant point he has.

I didn't argue that, FFS. That isn't ad hom. I explained how I reached that conclusion, via a logical process (which you didn't disagree with). Ad Hom is when you're disregarding someone's argument, based on his/her self, rather than the arguments.

I'm arguing that because he's shown himself to be a troll, that his arguments are more than likely going to be a waste of my time. The difference is that I'm not saying his arguments are a waste of time, just very likely to be.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/14/2014 8:41:47 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/14/2014 8:27:18 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 3/14/2014 8:20:55 AM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/14/2014 5:36:21 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 3/14/2014 4:44:27 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
You call me "troll" as an ad hom...

No, it isn't. I've looked at your trollish behaviour, and concluded based on that, that you are a troll. I once listened to what you had to say, but now that I've confirmed that you're a troll, I no longer want to talk to you.

Your arguments could still be valid, it's just that many are provably not, and since my time is limited, it could be spent better elsewhere.

Sounds like you are breaking your third rule:
Andoc is a troll therefore I will not respond to his argument.

Since Andoc is a troll (ad hom), you use this as justification to ignore any relevant point he has.

I didn't argue that, FFS. That isn't ad hom. I explained how I reached that conclusion, via a logical process (which you didn't disagree with). Ad Hom is when you're disregarding someone's argument, based on his/her self, rather than the arguments.

I'm arguing that because he's shown himself to be a troll, that his arguments are more than likely going to be a waste of my time. The difference is that I'm not saying his arguments are a waste of time, just very likely to be.

You are saying because he is a troll, his arguments are not worth consideration.
THAT IS THE VERY DEFINITION OF AD HOM!!!

Yes, your logic is sound. (I never said I disagreed with it)
However, you use that logic to dismiss any argument he makes. How is that not ad hom? Because X is Y, his argument should not be entertained. That is ad hom, right?

Because X is a racist, I am not listening to his argument putting blacks in a bad light.
Because X is rich, I am not listening to his argument about the plight of the poor.
Because X funded a tobacco study, I do not trust X's use of said results, which benefit him.
Because X is a known liar, I do not trust him.
Because X is a troll, I am not listening to his argument about anything.

These are ad homs, and they are justified with logic.
My work here is, finally, done.
Zarroette
Posts: 2,951
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/14/2014 8:44:24 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/14/2014 8:41:47 AM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/14/2014 8:27:18 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 3/14/2014 8:20:55 AM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/14/2014 5:36:21 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 3/14/2014 4:44:27 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
You call me "troll" as an ad hom...

No, it isn't. I've looked at your trollish behaviour, and concluded based on that, that you are a troll. I once listened to what you had to say, but now that I've confirmed that you're a troll, I no longer want to talk to you.

Your arguments could still be valid, it's just that many are provably not, and since my time is limited, it could be spent better elsewhere.

Sounds like you are breaking your third rule:
Andoc is a troll therefore I will not respond to his argument.

Since Andoc is a troll (ad hom), you use this as justification to ignore any relevant point he has.

I didn't argue that, FFS. That isn't ad hom. I explained how I reached that conclusion, via a logical process (which you didn't disagree with). Ad Hom is when you're disregarding someone's argument, based on his/her self, rather than the arguments.

I'm arguing that because he's shown himself to be a troll, that his arguments are more than likely going to be a waste of my time. The difference is that I'm not saying his arguments are a waste of time, just very likely to be.

You are saying because he is a troll, his arguments are not worth consideration.

NO, I DID NOT SAY THAT, FOR THE ONE BILLIONTH TIME. MY ARGUMENT IS VERY SIMILAR TO THAT, YES, BUT IT'S NOT THE SAME AS WHAT YOU CONTINUE TO SAY. IT IS NOT AD HOM, I'VE EXPLAINED WHY, AND NOW YOU'RE JUST REPEATING YOURSELF. I AM DONE WITH YOU, BYE.

THAT IS THE VERY DEFINITION OF AD HOM!!!

Yes, your logic is sound. (I never said I disagreed with it)
However, you use that logic to dismiss any argument he makes. How is that not ad hom? Because X is Y, his argument should not be entertained. That is ad hom, right?

Because X is a racist, I am not listening to his argument putting blacks in a bad light.
Because X is rich, I am not listening to his argument about the plight of the poor.
Because X funded a tobacco study, I do not trust X's use of said results, which benefit him.
Because X is a known liar, I do not trust him.
Because X is a troll, I am not listening to his argument about anything.

These are ad homs, and they are justified with logic.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/14/2014 8:48:13 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/14/2014 8:44:24 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 3/14/2014 8:41:47 AM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/14/2014 8:27:18 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 3/14/2014 8:20:55 AM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/14/2014 5:36:21 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 3/14/2014 4:44:27 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
You call me "troll" as an ad hom...

No, it isn't. I've looked at your trollish behaviour, and concluded based on that, that you are a troll. I once listened to what you had to say, but now that I've confirmed that you're a troll, I no longer want to talk to you.

Your arguments could still be valid, it's just that many are provably not, and since my time is limited, it could be spent better elsewhere.


Sounds like you are breaking your third rule:
Andoc is a troll therefore I will not respond to his argument.

Since Andoc is a troll (ad hom), you use this as justification to ignore any relevant point he has.

I didn't argue that, FFS. That isn't ad hom. I explained how I reached that conclusion, via a logical process (which you didn't disagree with). Ad Hom is when you're disregarding someone's argument, based on his/her self, rather than the arguments.

I'm arguing that because he's shown himself to be a troll, that his arguments are more than likely going to be a waste of my time. The difference is that I'm not saying his arguments are a waste of time, just very likely to be.

You are saying because he is a troll, his arguments are not worth consideration.

NO, I DID NOT SAY THAT, FOR THE ONE BILLIONTH TIME. MY ARGUMENT IS VERY SIMILAR TO THAT, YES, BUT IT'S NOT THE SAME AS WHAT YOU CONTINUE TO SAY. IT IS NOT AD HOM, I'VE EXPLAINED WHY, AND NOW YOU'RE JUST REPEATING YOURSELF. I AM DONE WITH YOU, BYE.

Look at the underlined.
You said you will not waste your time. You do not want to talk to him.
That is dismissing his arguments, in the event he has a valid one.
Show me why I am wrong, instead of just saying I am.

THAT IS THE VERY DEFINITION OF AD HOM!!!

Yes, your logic is sound. (I never said I disagreed with it)
However, you use that logic to dismiss any argument he makes. How is that not ad hom? Because X is Y, his argument should not be entertained. That is ad hom, right?

Because X is a racist, I am not listening to his argument putting blacks in a bad light.
Because X is rich, I am not listening to his argument about the plight of the poor.
Because X funded a tobacco study, I do not trust X's use of said results, which benefit him.
Because X is a known liar, I do not trust him.
Because X is a troll, I am not listening to his argument about anything.

These are ad homs, and they are justified with logic.
My work here is, finally, done.
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/14/2014 9:01:39 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
Why do people even bother engaging with Caplox? It's like talking to a rock with a busted Furby speaker in it.

We should burn her from the site, refuse to even acknowledge her existence and we'd all be better off.
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/14/2014 9:06:38 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/14/2014 9:05:07 AM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 3/14/2014 9:03:13 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
Shut up, CP.

Why can't I say random things like you?
I wanna be cool like badger!

You're a malicious sh*t dude.
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/14/2014 9:09:04 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/14/2014 9:06:38 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 3/14/2014 9:05:07 AM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 3/14/2014 9:03:13 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
Shut up, CP.

Why can't I say random things like you?
I wanna be cool like badger!

You're a malicious sh*t dude.

I can be. But so can you, and you know that.
Mikal
Posts: 11,270
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/14/2014 9:10:26 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
you should just do a debate at this point man or challenge. So the main threads aren't as clogged. This is going to turn into the YYW. DOL thing all over again.
NiqashMotawadi3
Posts: 1,895
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/14/2014 9:10:54 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
All personal attacks are ad hominem, but not all ad hominem are personal attacks.

No, not at all. You need to learn more about logic, Wrichirw.

"You are stupid, therefore you are wrong." That's an ad hom.

"You are wrong for reasons X and Y, you cretin" is not an ad hom.
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/14/2014 9:10:58 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/14/2014 9:09:04 AM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 3/14/2014 9:06:38 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 3/14/2014 9:05:07 AM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 3/14/2014 9:03:13 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
Shut up, CP.

Why can't I say random things like you?
I wanna be cool like badger!

You're a malicious sh*t dude.

I can be. But so can you, and you know that.

I'm never malicious just to be malicious.
ADreamOfLiberty
Posts: 1,570
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/14/2014 9:15:50 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/14/2014 9:10:26 AM, Mikal wrote:
you should just do a debate at this point man or challenge. So the main threads aren't as clogged. This is going to turn into the YYW. DOL thing all over again.

That is not possible, for that you would need another ADOL.... and another YYW.
LOL, yeah, it's pretty amazing how they think they can "reason" with you. - Sidewalker, speaking of advocates for sexual deviancy.

So, my advice, Liberty, is to go somewhere else. Leave, and never come back. - YYW

And that's what I did. Contact me at http://www.edeb8.com... by the same user name if you have anything you'd like to say.
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/14/2014 9:48:47 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/14/2014 9:10:54 AM, NiqashMotawadi3 wrote:
All personal attacks are ad hominem, but not all ad hominem are personal attacks.

No, not at all. You need to learn more about logic, Wrichirw.

"You are stupid, therefore you are wrong." That's an ad hom.

"You are wrong for reasons X and Y, you cretin" is not an ad hom.

"You cretin" is an attempt by the person to discredit the other party. Such an attempt, by calling him a cretin, is an attack on the person and not the reasoning, and is thus an ad hominem that is irrelevant to the argumentation.

Unfortunately I think you need to take your own advice.
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/14/2014 9:51:54 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/14/2014 9:48:47 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 3/14/2014 9:10:54 AM, NiqashMotawadi3 wrote:
All personal attacks are ad hominem, but not all ad hominem are personal attacks.

No, not at all. You need to learn more about logic, Wrichirw.

"You are stupid, therefore you are wrong." That's an ad hom.

"You are wrong for reasons X and Y, you cretin" is not an ad hom.

"You cretin" is an attempt by the person to discredit the other party. Such an attempt, by calling him a cretin, is an attack on the person and not the reasoning, and is thus an ad hominem that is irrelevant to the argumentation.

Unfortunately I think you need to take your own advice.

+ 10^999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999