Ad hominem: Wikis

  
  

Did you know ...


More interesting facts on Ad hominem

Include this on your site/blog:

Encyclopedia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

.An ad hominem argument, also known as argumentum ad hominem (Latin: "argument toward the person" or "argument against the person"), is an argument which links the validity of a premise to a characteristic or belief of the person advocating the premise.^ B is abusive, but his argument is still not ad hominem.
  • Ad Hominem 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC plover.net [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ ARGUMENTS AD HOMINEM " Ad hominem " literally means to "attack the man" (or person).
  • CRI Journal - CRJ0181A 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC www.iclnet.org [Source type: Original source]

^ Argumentum ad hominem is a Latin phrase translated literally as "argument [aimed] at the person," but usually translated as "argument to the man."

[1] .The ad hominem argument is not a fallacy despite there being fallacious instances of the argument.^ Related: fallacy of treason, fallacy ad hominem.
  • Sic Semper Tyrannis - Categories: Discourse, philosophy, libertarianism 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC www.autodogmatic.com [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ B is abusive, but his argument is still not ad hominem.
  • Ad Hominem 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC plover.net [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ Is that a fallacious Ad Hominem argument?
  • Sarah Palin Is Not Stupid 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC skeptoid.com [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

[2] .Fallacious instances of the ad hominem argument are presented below.^ What are some examples of some ad hominem fallacies?
  • What are some examples of some ad hominem fallacies? - Yahoo! Answers 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC answers.yahoo.com [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ B is abusive, but his argument is still not ad hominem.
  • Ad Hominem 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC plover.net [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ Is that a fallacious Ad Hominem argument?
  • Sarah Palin Is Not Stupid 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC skeptoid.com [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

Contents

Structure of the argument

An ad hominem argument has the basic form:
Person 1 makes claim X
There is something objectionable about Person 1
Therefore claim X is false
.The first premise is called a 'factual claim' and is the pivot point of much debate.^ First, it is usually impossible to check every factual claim made by someone putting an argument.
  • John Quiggin » Ad hominem ad nauseam 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC johnquiggin.com [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ There is far too much name-calling, dragging stuff from thread to thread, addressing people personally instead of addressing the points being made.
  • Let's stop these ad hominem-themed derails, ok? | MetaTalk 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC metatalk.metafilter.com [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ He didn't verify his first point in the first place-namely that the reason for using Allah is to call God by whatever name you chose.

The contention is referred to as an 'inferential claim' and represents the reasoning process. .There are two types of inferential claim, explicit and implicit.^ If there is an important difference between the two cases it is that writers of the second type should be prepared to hear criticism of their style as criticism of their substance and vice versa .
  • Peter Suber, "Fichte's Ad Hominem Arguments" 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC www.earlham.edu [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ Important Microorganism Safety Issues for Herbs There are two types of bacteria: aerobic and anaerobic.

.The fallacy does not represent a valid form of reasoning because even if you accept both co-premises, that does not guarantee the truthfulness of the contention.^ They are valid because you say they are?
  • Supreme Court Won�t Rush Same-Sex Ruling - CBS News 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC www.cbsnews.com [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]
  • Supreme Court Won�t Rush Same-Sex Ruling - CBS News 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC www.cbsnews.com [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ The reason is because your government represents you, whether you like it or not.
  • The Objectivist Death Cult by Justin Raimondo 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC www.lewrockwell.com [Source type: Original source]

^ This formal fallacy is often mistaken for modus tollens, a valid form of argument using the conditional.
  • Fallacies [The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy] 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC www.iep.utm.edu [Source type: Original source]

.This can also be thought of as the argument having an un-stated co-premise.^ Appeal to inappropriate authority ( ad verecundiam ): When the premises of an argument appeal to the judgment of some party or parties having no legitimate claim to authority in the matter at hand.
  • Fallacies: Mark McIntire 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC www.markmcintire.com [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ You should always state the premises of the argument explicitly; this is the principle of audiatur et altera pars.
  • Atheism: Logic & Fallacies 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC www.infidels.org [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ The argument presumes the truth of a premise that isn’t stated, namely that abortion is murder.
  • A Short Catalog of Informal Fallacies 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC ww2.coastal.edu [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

[citation needed]

Usage

In informal logic

.The term ad hominem has sometimes been used more literally, to describe an argument that was based on an individual, or to describe any personal attack.^ Ad hominem” means you attack the man INSTEAD of attacking the argument.
  • Hot Air » Blog Archive » Video: Chris Wallace rips Hillary’s “non-apology apology” 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC hotair.com [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ Re: abusive person/ ad hominem attacks .
  • abusive person/ ad hominem attacks - tribe.net bugs (Archive) - tribe.net 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC tribebugs.tribe.net [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ Ad hominem is not defined as a personal attack.
  • Feds sue Montco swim club for discrimination - The ReporterNews: Serving North Penn, Indian Valley and neighboring communities 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC www.thereporteronline.com [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

  .However, this is not how the meaning of the term is typically introduced in modern logic and rhetoric textbooks, and logicians and rhetoricians are in agreement that this use (equated with "personal attack") is incorrect.^ In logic and rhetoric, an ad hominem argument, which attempts to discredit the person mounting the criticism, is considered invalid, since the substance of the charge has not been addressed.
  • Sheila Bair Launches Ad Hominem Attack on Subprime Plan’s Critics « naked capitalism 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC www.nakedcapitalism.com [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ 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.
  • Ad Hominem 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC plover.net [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]
  • Ben Smith's Blog: The president-elect's Wednesday - Politico.com 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC www.politico.com [Source type: General]

^ You are right that in classical logic ad hominem attacks are invalid (using the classical logic definition of the word).
  • The Volokh Conspiracy - On Ad Hominem Arguments: 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC www.volokh.com [Source type: Original source]

[citation needed]
Example:
"You claim that this man is innocent, but you cannot be trusted since you are a criminal as well."
.This argument would generally be accepted as reasonable, as regards personal evidence, on the premise that criminals are likely to lie to protect each other.^ If you accept the premises, A's argument is sound.
  • Ad Hominem 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC plover.net [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ Relates the basic types of fallacy identified by Johnson & Blair (irrelevant reason, hasty conclusion, and problematic premise) to their general definition of fallacy.
  • Reason Reclaimed Contents 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC www.valepress.com [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ Appealing to personal considerations rather than to logic or reason: Debaters should avoid ad hominem arguments that question their opponents' motives.
  • Jim Fetzer and John Hutchison 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC drjudywood.com [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

.On the other hand, it is a valid example of ad hominem if the source making the claim is doing so on the basis of evidence independent of its own credibility.^ Example One: Ad Hominem 10.
  • Informal Logic (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy) 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC plato.stanford.edu [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ An example of an ad hominem attack is “Mr.
  • James Bach’s Blog » Blog Archive » Sometimes it Gets Personal 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC www.satisfice.com [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ And he has the gall to conclude his article with the claim that he is not making ad hominem arguments.
  • More ad hominem 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC www.wnd.com [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

In general, ad hominem criticism of evidence cannot prove the negative of the proposition being claimed:
Example:
"Tom says the umpire made the correct call, but this can't be true, because Tom is the father of the boy who was "safe" on second base."
.Assuming Tom is the father of the baseball player, his viewpoint is uncritical and may therefore be scrutinized, but the umpire may nonetheless have made the right call.^ In May 1995, Lukashenka called a referendum that overwhelmingly backed his policy of integration with Russia and made Russian the second official language in the country.
  • Belarusian Review :: Belarus: Lukashenka - Father Of The Nation, Or Loudmouth Autocrat? 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC www.belreview.cz [Source type: Original source]

^ This is like a skeptic who refuses to call a group of nine players who win the World Series a baseball team.

Types of ad hominems

.Three traditionally identified varieties are ad hominem abusive (or ad personam), ad hominem circumstantial, and ad hominem tu quoque.^ B is abusive, but his argument is still not ad hominem.
  • Ad Hominem 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC plover.net [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ Different kinds of ad hominem (abusive, tu quoque , and circumstantial ad hominem ) are different violations of this rule.
  • Informal Logic (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy) 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC plato.stanford.edu [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ Ad hominem can take a variety of forms.
  • HOW TO SPOT FUZZY THINKING (This Rock: August 1990) 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC www.catholic.com [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

[citation needed]

Ad hominem abusive

.Ad hominem abusive usually involves insulting or belittling one's opponent, but can also involve pointing out factual but ostensible character flaws or actions which are irrelevant to the opponent's argument.^ Example One: Ad Hominem 10.
  • Informal Logic (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy) 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC plato.stanford.edu [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ B's reply here is ad hominem and abusive.
  • Ad Hominem 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC plover.net [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ B is abusive, but his argument is still not ad hominem.
  • Ad Hominem 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC plover.net [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

.This tactic is logically fallacious because insults and even true negative facts about the opponent's personal character have nothing to do with the logical merits of the opponent's arguments or assertions.^ B: "You know nothing about logic."
  • Ad Hominem 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC plover.net [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ Ad hominem arguments are a logical fallacy.
  • RealClimate: Historical climatology in Greenland 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC www.realclimate.org [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ Logic & Fallacies Constructing a Logical Argument (1997) .
  • Atheism: Logic & Fallacies 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC www.infidels.org [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

Examples:
.
  • "You can't believe Jack when he says God exists.^ It says in the Bible that God exists.
    • A Short Catalog of Informal Fallacies 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC ww2.coastal.edu [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

    ^ Can Menj show you a single reference in which the Bible says that God's name is "GOD" or is it that YHWH was always used to describe Elohim.

    ^ We believe that some of our gods ('aalihatinaa) have afflicted you with a curse."

    .He doesn't even have a job."
  • "Candidate Jane's proposal about zoning is ridiculous.^ There was even the smell of scandal when two top Democratic candidates were found sharing information about Dean in an attempt to slow him down.
    • The Assassination of Howard Dean | | AlterNet 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC www.alternet.org [Source type: News]

    She was caught cheating on her taxes in 2003."
See: Common misconceptions about argumentum ad hominem below

Ad hominem circumstantial

.Ad hominem circumstantial points out that someone is in circumstances such that he is disposed to take a particular position.^ This is a kind of ad hominem, circumstantial fallacy.
  • Fallacies [The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy] 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC www.iep.utm.edu [Source type: Original source]

^ Argumentum ad Hominem (circumstantial).
  • Logical Fallacies 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC education.gsu.edu [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ There's the circumstantial ad hominem.
  • OpEdNews - Article: The Ad Hominem 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC www.opednews.com [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

.Ad hominem circumstantial constitutes an attack on the bias of a source.^ I found an ad hominem attack!
  • Documenting James White... - Catholic Answers Forums 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC forums.catholic.com [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ Ad hominem is not defined as a personal attack.
  • Feds sue Montco swim club for discrimination - The ReporterNews: Serving North Penn, Indian Valley and neighboring communities 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC www.thereporteronline.com [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ But it would not be an ad hominem attack.
  • James Bach’s Blog » Blog Archive » Sometimes it Gets Personal 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC www.satisfice.com [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

.This is fallacious because a disposition to make a certain argument does not make the argument false; this overlaps with the genetic fallacy (an argument that a claim is incorrect due to its source).^ But the false dilemma fallacy is due to false premises.
  • Fallacies [The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy] 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC www.iep.utm.edu [Source type: Original source]

^ This is the "fallacy fallacy" of arguing that a proposition is false because it has been presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
  • LOGICAL FALLACIES: a listing 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC skeptically.org [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ Not only does this avoid the argument about how to preserve a marriage, it dismisses the fact that Dave is trying to stop Brian from making the same mistakes.
  • έχω ζωη (Echo Zoe) » Lessons in Logic #4: Tu Quoque 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC www.echozoe.com [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

.Where the source taking a position seeks to convince us by a claim of authority, or personal observation, observation of their circumstances may reduce the evidentiary weight of the claims, sometimes to zero.^ Argument ad hominem is the converse of appeal to authority, in which the arguer bases the truth value of an assertion on the authority, knowledge or position of the person asserting it.
  • Letters: Mike Allen, consummate Beltway "journalist" - Salon 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC letters.salon.com [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ Michael on Horror crash claims five lives Accident do happen, Speeding may sometimes occur accidentally.
  • Senator attack 'criminal' Scientology 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC www.3aw.com.au [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ It is the logical fallacy that the truth of a claim depends on the qualities, virtues, or circumstances of the person making the claim.
  • The Partial Observer - In Defense of the Ad Hominem 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC www.partialobserver.com [Source type: Original source]

[3]
Examples:
.Mandy Rice-Davies's famous testimony during the Profumo Affair, "Well, he would [say that], wouldn't he?", is an example of a valid circumstantial argument.^ One example of a straw man argument would be to say, "Mr.
  • Logical Fallacies and the Art of Debate 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC www.csun.edu [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ The unacceptability of such arguments might be demonstrated with many examples, as with the argument "If all sex acts were eliminated, we would eliminate sexually transmitted diseases.
  • Informal Logic (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy) 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC plato.stanford.edu [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ Here's an example of an argument which is valid, and which may or may not be sound: .
  • Atheism: Logic & Fallacies 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC www.infidels.org [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

.Her point was that since a man in a prominent position, accused of an affair with a callgirl, would deny the claim whether it was true or false, his denial, in itself, carries little evidential weight against the claim of an affair.^ Arguments from "Authorities" carry little weight.
  • A List of Bad Debating Tactics, and a Recipe for Reasoned Thought. ALL READ PLEASE! - PC Perspective Forums 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC forums.pcper.com [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ Ad hominem is "against the man", a form of argument that basically claims that the validity of a given proposition is dependent upon the identity of the individual making that argument.
  • Letters: Mike Allen, consummate Beltway "journalist" - Salon 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC letters.salon.com [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ When those trained in the respective disciplines of medicine, philosophy, and theology are unable to arrive at any consensus, the judiciary, at this point in the development of man's knowledge, is not in a position to speculate."
  • CRI Journal - CRJ0181A 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC www.iclnet.org [Source type: Original source]

.Note, however, that this argument is valid only insofar as it devalues the denial; it does not bolster the original claim.^ Not only does this avoid the argument about how to preserve a marriage, it dismisses the fact that Dave is trying to stop Brian from making the same mistakes.
  • έχω ζωη (Echo Zoe) » Lessons in Logic #4: Tu Quoque 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC www.echozoe.com [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ Ad hominem is "against the man", a form of argument that basically claims that the validity of a given proposition is dependent upon the identity of the individual making that argument.
  • Letters: Mike Allen, consummate Beltway "journalist" - Salon 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC letters.salon.com [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ This shows that the claim that 'YHWH' is the "only true name" for God certanly does not hold water.

.To construe evidentiary invalidation of the denial as evidentiary validation of the original claim is fallacious (on several different bases, including that of argumentum ad hominem); however likely the man in question would be to deny an affair that did in fact happen, he could only be more likely to deny an affair that never did.^ Is that a fallacious Ad Hominem argument?
  • Sarah Palin Is Not Stupid 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC skeptoid.com [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ But it would not be an ad hominem attack.
  • James Bach’s Blog » Blog Archive » Sometimes it Gets Personal 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC www.satisfice.com [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ This is a kind of ad hominem, circumstantial fallacy.
  • Fallacies [The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy] 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC www.iep.utm.edu [Source type: Original source]

Ad hominem tu quoque

Ad hominem tu quoque (lit: "You too!") refers to a claim that the source making the argument has spoken or acted in a way inconsistent with the argument. In particular, if Source A criticizes the actions of Source B, a tu quoque response is that Source A has acted in the same way. .This argument is fallacious because it does not disprove the argument; if the premise is true then Source A may be a hypocrite, but this does not make the statement less credible from a logical perspective.^ Does not logically follow from the argument presented.

^ This is because Bolton just as I am making an argument under informal logic.
  • Think Progress » Bolton Bristles When Challenged On Getting It Wrong On Iraq: That’s ‘An Ad Hominem Attack’ 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC thinkprogress.org [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ It also goes, does it not, to the credibility of those making the argument?” .
  • Think Progress » Bolton Bristles When Challenged On Getting It Wrong On Iraq: That’s ‘An Ad Hominem Attack’ 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC thinkprogress.org [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

.Indeed, Source A may be in a position to provide personal testimony on the negative consequences of the stated action.^ Although you may not be attacking A 's personality, you are still using an irrelevant fact about A to attack A 's position.
  • Fallacy Files Weblog Archive: April, 2003 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC www.fallacyfiles.org [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ Emotions and ideas may be positive, such as enhancement of self-esteem, or negative, such as hatred of an ethnic group.

^ Note 1.  In an AH argument the conclusion is that some "position" or "viewpoint" is false, or should be rejected.  So AH arguments have "negative" conclusions.  Sometimes the personal criticism stated in the reasons is very obvious, sometimes it is rather indirect.  A common variety of AH is to criticize someone for "not practicing what he preaches" and then rejecting what he preaches.
  • http://www.philosophy.eku.edu/WILLIAMS/HON102Web/falsec-web.htm 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC www.philosophy.eku.edu [Source type: Original source]

.For example, a father may tell his son not to start smoking as he will regret it when he is older, and the son may point out that his father is or was a smoker.^ The person informing them of the woeful inadequacy of their education may have nothing but the best intentions (that a failing be pointed out so it may be corrected).
  • Philosophy Now Forum • View topic - Argumentum Ad Hominem REDUX 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC forum.philosophynow.org [Source type: Original source]

^ PM on January 25, 2006 In my defence, I'd like to point out that lodurr started it.
  • Let's stop these ad hominem-themed derails, ok? | MetaTalk 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC metatalk.metafilter.com [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ This is can be boiled down to, ?I am telling you how inadequate I truly am to feel I must point out to you the error of your misguided ways.?
  • Ben Smith's Blog: The president-elect's Wednesday - Politico.com 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC www.politico.com [Source type: General]

.This does not alter the fact that his son may regret smoking when he is older, and the fact his father was a smoker means he can talk from a position of experience.^ In fact if I had sons I'd mute it for them too or they might think that being a man means agression, speed, and confrontation.

^ Hence, just because a philosophically and scientifically plausible position may also be found in religious literature such as the Bible, that does not mean such a view is exclusively "religious."
  • CRI Journal - CRJ0181A 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC www.iclnet.org [Source type: Original source]

^ The mere fact that a thing or idea has endured for a long time does not mean it cannot be improved upon, or abandoned if it becomes obsolete.

Guilt by association

.Guilt by association can sometimes also be a type of ad hominem fallacy, if the argument attacks a source because of the similarity between the views of someone making an argument and other proponents of the argument.^ AM EST ad hominem attack .
  • POLITICO Forums:Ideas: Michael Steele: Down, not dead - POLITICO.com 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC dyn.politico.com [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ Ad hominem” means you attack the man INSTEAD of attacking the argument.
  • Hot Air » Blog Archive » Video: Chris Wallace rips Hillary’s “non-apology apology” 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC hotair.com [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ Don't use ad hominem attacks in your arguments.
  • The cult of Noynoy Aquino 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC thepoc.net [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

[citation needed]
This form of the argument is as follows:
Source A makes claim P.
Group B also make claim P.
Therefore, source A is a member of group B.

Inverse ad hominem

.An inverse ad hominem argument praises a source in order to add support for that source's argument or claim.^ B is abusive, but his argument is still not ad hominem.
  • Ad Hominem 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC plover.net [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ Is that a fallacious Ad Hominem argument?
  • Sarah Palin Is Not Stupid 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC skeptoid.com [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ A's argument was not ad hominem.
  • Ad Hominem 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC plover.net [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

[citation needed] A fallacious inverse ad hominem argument may go something like this:
"That man was smartly-dressed and charming, so I'll accept his argument that I should vote for him"
.As with regular ad hominem arguments, not all cases of inverse ad hominem are fallacious.^ Is that a fallacious Ad Hominem argument?
  • Sarah Palin Is Not Stupid 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC skeptoid.com [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ Re: Ad Hominem arguments .
  • Ad Hominem arguments--- SP posters and their debate/presentation style - SportsBubbler.com Community 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC community.sportsbubbler.com [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ Rejecting ad hominem attacks and arguments .
  • Rejecting ad hominem attacks and arguments 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC www.infowars.net [Source type: Original source]

Consider the following:
".Elizabeth has never told a lie in her entire life, and she says she saw him take the bag.^ What the Quran says must be true, since to call Allah any name is fine and Allah never lies ( Here, we must agree that Allah says you can call him whatever name .

^ Hence, the pro-life advocate who believes in capital punishment is saying, "It is wrong to take the life of an innocent human being, but the capital offender is not innocent.
  • CRI Journal - CRJ0181A 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC www.iclnet.org [Source type: Original source]

^ That or the Dems don't want to strip him and then have the GOP say "Look, Obama can't take criticism, he wants to trample on Lieberman's constitutional rights of free speech".
  • TPM Election Central | Talking Points Memo | Lieberman: Obama Has Not Always "Put The Country First" 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

She must be telling the truth.
"
.Here the arguer is not suggesting we accept Elizabeth's argument, but her testimony.^ In a bandwagon argument the arguer uses the common desire to fit in with the crowd in order to make his conclusion more likely to be accepted.
  • A Short Catalog of Informal Fallacies 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC ww2.coastal.edu [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ Other approaches to informal logic are characterized by a more sympathetic attitude to ad hominem arguments which accepts that criticisms of an arguer (as opposed to their position) can be appropriate.
  • Informal Logic (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy) 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC plato.stanford.edu [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

.Her being an honest person is relevant to the truth of the conclusion (that he took the bag), just as her having bad eyesight (a regular case of ad hominem) would give reason not to believe her.^ Ad hominem is not defined as a personal attack.
  • Feds sue Montco swim club for discrimination - The ReporterNews: Serving North Penn, Indian Valley and neighboring communities 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC www.thereporteronline.com [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ Person B has just made an ad hominem attack.
  • Are ad hominem attacks necessary to an atheist position? - Atheism vs Christianity | Google Groups 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC groups.google.com [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ "The abusive ad hominem is not just a case of directing abusive language toward another person.
  • OpEdNews - Article: Ad Hominem Attacks 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC www.opednews.com [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

.However, the last part of the argument is false even if the premise is true, since having never told a lie before does not mean she isn't now.^ Irrelevant Premises An irrelevant premise is one which, regardless of whether it is true or false, does not pertain to the argument.

^ If the premises are true, the conclusion cannot be false.
  • Informal Logic (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy) 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC plato.stanford.edu [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ In such cases, it is impossible for the conclusion of the argument to be false if the premises are true.
  • Informal Logic (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy) 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC plato.stanford.edu [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

.Appeal to authority is a type of inverse ad hominem argument.^ B is abusive, but his argument is still not ad hominem.
  • Ad Hominem 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC plover.net [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ Is that a fallacious Ad Hominem argument?
  • Sarah Palin Is Not Stupid 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC skeptoid.com [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ A's argument was not ad hominem.
  • Ad Hominem 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC plover.net [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

Common misconceptions about ad hominem

.Gratuitous verbal abuse or "name-calling" itself is not an argumentum ad hominem or a logical fallacy.^ Is that a fallacious Ad Hominem argument?
  • Sarah Palin Is Not Stupid 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC skeptoid.com [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ I'm not sure how an ad hominem attack is a "logical fallacy."
  • The Volokh Conspiracy - On Ad Hominem Arguments: 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC www.volokh.com [Source type: Original source]

^ This is a kind of ad hominem, circumstantial fallacy.
  • Fallacies [The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy] 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC www.iep.utm.edu [Source type: Original source]

[4][5][6][7][8] .The fallacy only occurs if personal attacks are employed instead of an argument to devalue an argument by attacking the speaker, not personal insults in the middle of an otherwise sound argument or insults that stand alone.^ Note that B directly engages A's argument: he is not attacking the person A instead of his argument.
  • Ad Hominem 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC plover.net [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ He is not attacking the person instead of the argument.
  • Ad Hominem 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC plover.net [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ Instead of attacking an assertion, the argument attacks the person who made the assertion.

."X's argument is invalid because X's analogy is false, there are differences between a republic and a democracy.^ As mentioned earlier, there is a difference between argument and explanation.
  • Atheism: Logic & Fallacies 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC www.infidels.org [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ Eventually I'd have to conclude there's no difference between a 93 and a 33, simply because each increment is such a slight degree.
  • HOW TO SPOT FUZZY THINKING (This Rock: August 1990) 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC www.catholic.com [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ Fortunately, there are notable exceptions among funding agencies who know that there is a difference between popular stereotypes and serious researchers.

But then again, X is idiotically ignorant." is gratuitously abusive but is not a fallacy because .X's argument is actually addressed directly in the opening statement.^ B's reply is not ad hominem, since it directly addresses A's argument (correctly characterising it as ad hominem).
  • Ad Hominem 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC plover.net [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ Now it's clear that the statement, which looked like an argument, is actually assuming the result which it is supposed to be proving, in order to explain the Einstein quote.
  • Atheism: Logic & Fallacies 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC www.infidels.org [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

"X is idiotically ignorant" is not a fallacy of itself. .It is an argument that X doesn't know the difference between a republic and a democracy.^ Fortunately, there are notable exceptions among funding agencies who know that there is a difference between popular stereotypes and serious researchers.

^ An equivocation is made when a word is used in more than one meaning within the same argument without distinguishing between the different meanings.
  • A Short Catalog of Informal Fallacies 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC ww2.coastal.edu [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ Many Arabs I know over here still don't know the difference between Islam and Arab Nationalism!

.This is not to be confused with a true fallacy, which would be "X is idiotically ignorant [of politics], so why should we listen to him now?"^ Showing or giving a good explanation why an argument is fallacious does not show that the argument has a false conclusion!!!  Fallacious arguments, which are almost always invalid arguments, may well have true conclusions.
  • http://www.philosophy.eku.edu/WILLIAMS/HON102Web/falsec-web.htm 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC www.philosophy.eku.edu [Source type: Original source]

^ Now if YHWH is just a title, why isn't Kanah used in the verses for him in replacement of Shem?

^ On the other hand, if you can show that the original argument actually commits a logical fallacy, you put the opposition in the position of justifying why their original argument should be considered at all .
  • Logical Fallacies and the Art of Debate 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC www.csun.edu [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

."In reality, ad hominem is unrelated to sarcasm or personal abuse.^ Reality is an ad hominem attack?
  • Think Progress » Bolton Bristles When Challenged On Getting It Wrong On Iraq: That’s ‘An Ad Hominem Attack’ 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC thinkprogress.org [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ Argument against the person (ad hominem) .
  • A Short Catalog of Informal Fallacies 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC ww2.coastal.edu [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ In reality, ad hominem is unrelated to sarcasm or personal abuse.
  • Ad Hominem 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC plover.net [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]
  • Ben Smith's Blog: The president-elect's Wednesday - Politico.com 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC www.politico.com [Source type: General]

.Argumentum ad hominem is the logical fallacy of attempting to undermine a speaker's argument by attacking the speaker instead of addressing the argument.^ AM EST ad hominem attack .
  • POLITICO Forums:Ideas: Michael Steele: Down, not dead - POLITICO.com 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC dyn.politico.com [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ I found an ad hominem attack!
  • Documenting James White... - Catholic Answers Forums 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC forums.catholic.com [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ Don't use ad hominem attacks in your arguments.
  • The cult of Noynoy Aquino 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC thepoc.net [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

.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.^ I found an ad hominem attack!
  • Documenting James White... - Catholic Answers Forums 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC forums.catholic.com [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ Ad hominem” means you attack the man INSTEAD of attacking the argument.
  • Hot Air » Blog Archive » Video: Chris Wallace rips Hillary’s “non-apology apology” 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC hotair.com [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ Does not logically follow from the argument presented.

.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."^ Ad hominem arguments are a logical fallacy.
  • RealClimate: Historical climatology in Greenland 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC www.realclimate.org [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ Logic & Fallacies Constructing a Logical Argument (1997) .
  • Atheism: Logic & Fallacies 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC www.infidels.org [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ 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.
  • Ben Smith's Blog: The president-elect's Wednesday - Politico.com 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC www.politico.com [Source type: General]

[4]
."You are just an ignorant twit."^ X just leaves you ignorant of whether X is true or false, so it does not enable you to correctly conclude anything about X's opposite.
  • http://www.philosophy.eku.edu/WILLIAMS/HON102Web/falsec-web.htm 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC www.philosophy.eku.edu [Source type: Original source]

This is an insult and it is abusive, but it is not an argument. .Because it is not an argument, it cannot be a fallacy.^ Arguments will not help the ignorant and unconvinced because "this consciousness cannot be demonstrated to anyone; each person must freely create it in himself" (11; cf.
  • Peter Suber, "Fichte's Ad Hominem Arguments" 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC www.earlham.edu [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

^ This argument is fallacious because a whole may be greater than the sum of its parts; that is, it may have properties not possessed by its parts.
  • Introduction To Activistic Atheism 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC www.positiveatheism.org [Source type: Original source]

^ It's a fallacy because it fails to deal with the actual arguments that have been made.
  • Atheism: Logic & Fallacies 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC www.infidels.org [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]
  • LOGICAL FALLACIES: a listing 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC skeptically.org [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

.Of course, that doesn't mean that such personal insults are OK - just that when they appear alone, they aren't logical fallacies.^ I claim that such reasoning is a logical fallacy and that it doesn't > work.
  • Re: WARNING: Off Topic/ad hominem 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC lists.essential.org [Source type: Original source]

^ 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.
  • Ben Smith's Blog: The president-elect's Wednesday - Politico.com 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC www.politico.com [Source type: General]

^ Do they all rely on some form of logical fallacy?
  • The Volokh Conspiracy - On Ad Hominem Arguments: 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC www.volokh.com [Source type: Original source]

[9]

See also

References

  1. ^ "ad hominem: West's Encyclopedia of American Law (Full Article) from". Answers.com. 2007-09-10. http://www.answers.com/topic/ad-hominem. Retrieved 2009-11-08. 
  2. ^ Walton, Douglas (2008). Informal Logic: A Pragmatic Approach. Cambridge University Press. pp. 190 pp. 
  3. ^ fallacyfiles.org (2007). "Argumentum ad Hominem". fallacyfiles.org. http://www.fallacyfiles.org/adhomine.html. Retrieved September 10, 2007. 
  4. ^ a b "Ad Hominem". Plover.net. http://plover.net/~bonds/adhominem.html. Retrieved 2009-11-08. 
  5. ^ "Logical Fallacy: Argumentum ad Hominem". Fallacyfiles.org. http://www.fallacyfiles.org/adhomine.html. Retrieved 2009-11-08. 
  6. ^ "Logic Fallacies". The Autonomist. http://theautonomist.com/aaphp/permanent/fallacies.php#adhom. Retrieved 2009-11-08. 
  7. ^ "AdHominem". Drury.edu. http://www.drury.edu/ess/Logic/Informal/AdHominem.html. Retrieved 2009-11-08. 
  8. ^ "Logical Fallacies» Ad Hominem (Personal Attack)". Logicalfallacies.info. http://www.logicalfallacies.info/relevance/ad-hominem/. Retrieved 2009-11-08. 
  9. ^ "Fallacies of Relevance: Abusive ad hominem". Atheism.about.com. 2009-10-29. http://atheism.about.com/library/FAQs/skepticism/blfaq_fall_abusive.htm. Retrieved 2009-11-08. 

Further reading

  • Hurley, Patrick (2000). .A Concise Introduction to Logic, Seventh Edition.^ (The general grouping of the fallacies below, along with some of the examples, are from Patrick Hurley, A Concise Introduction to Logic , 4th ed., Wadsworth, 1982) .
    • A Short Catalog of Informal Fallacies 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC ww2.coastal.edu [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

    ^ Hurley, Patrick J. A Concise Introduction to Logic.
    • Fallacies 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC www.unc.edu [Source type: Original source]

    wadsworth, a division of Thompson Learning. pp. 125–128, .182. ISBN 0534520065. 
  • Copi, Irving M. and Cohen, Carl.^ Copi, Irving M. and Carl Cohen.
    • Fallacies 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC www.unc.edu [Source type: Original source]

    .Introduction to Logic (8th Ed.^ (The general grouping of the fallacies below, along with some of the examples, are from Patrick Hurley, A Concise Introduction to Logic , 4th ed., Wadsworth, 1982) .
    • A Short Catalog of Informal Fallacies 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC ww2.coastal.edu [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

    ), p. 97-100.
  • Walton, Douglas (1998). .Ad Hominem Arguments.^ (That > is, you resort to a moralistic ad hominem argument.
    • Re: WARNING: Off Topic/ad hominem 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC lists.essential.org [Source type: Original source]

    ^ Reply I take this evaluation of the ad hominem index as an indicator of both the strength of argument and the strength of the arguer.
    • On Economic Debate--the ad hominem index - Econosseur 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC www.econosseur.com [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

    ^ Ad hominem” means you attack the man INSTEAD of attacking the argument.
    • Hot Air » Blog Archive » Video: Chris Wallace rips Hillary’s “non-apology apology” 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC hotair.com [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

    .Tuscaloosa: University Alabama Press.^ Tuscaloosa, University of Alabama Press.
    • Informal Logic (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy) 10 February 2010 10:48 UTC plato.stanford.edu [Source type: FILTERED WITH BAYES]

    pp. 240 pp.
     

External links


Simple English

Ad hominem is a Latin term. It is used in rhetoric. Rhetoric is the science of how to speak well, and how to convince other people of your ideas.

Translated to English, ad hominem means against the person (Latin homo, where hominem is a form is gender-neutral. In ancient Rome it referred to all free men, and by extension to all free human beings).

The term is used to describe a rhetorical argument, that is directed towards the person who says something, not about the cause at hand. It is a way to use reputation and rumour and hearsay to change minds.

When a social network has already excluded or exiled one person, or applied a label to them, this works more often.

Because it works and is also unfair to everyone who would benefit from what they say, it is considered to be a weak or poor argument. Formal disapproval of those who use it is common in a court or in diplomacy, where danger is high.

Contents

What an ad hominem argument looks like

In logic, a proof is something that starts with premises, and goes through a few logical arguments, to reach a conclusion.

Normal (valid) proof

  1. All humans are mortal
  2. Socrates is a man (he is human)
  3. Therefore, Socrates is mortal.

Ad hominem example

  1. Person A thinks abortion should be illegal
  2. Person A is uneducated and poor
  3. Therefore abortion should not be illegal.

In this example it can be seen that the (completely unrelated) fact that person A is uneducated and poor is used to prove that abortion should not be illegal.

Other pages

  • Fallacy for a list of other types of (false) rhetorical arguments.


Citable sentences

Up to date as of December 28, 2010

Here are sentences from other pages on Ad hominem, which are similar to those in the above article.








Got something to say? Make a comment.
Your name
Your email address
Message