An Analysis of Ad Hominem Attacks

  • Thread starter Thread starter jedishrfu
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Analysis
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around ad hominem attacks, particularly in the context of online arguments and political discourse. Participants explore the nature of these attacks, their prevalence, and potential responses to them, touching on philosophical implications and reasoning techniques.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants highlight the prevalence of ad hominem attacks in both online interactions and political discourse, expressing concern over the decline of rational argumentation.
  • One participant shares a video intended to illustrate troll attack methodologies, suggesting that understanding these tactics can help individuals avoid falling victim to them.
  • Another participant reflects on personal experiences with political debates, noting that some individuals employ tactics like changing the subject to avoid addressing fallacies, although they question if this should be classified as a formal fallacy.
  • There is mention of the need for better education in logic to combat fallacious reasoning, with a humorous suggestion that future generations could become more logical thinkers.
  • Some participants express frustration with the lack of acknowledgment of fallacies in discussions, particularly in political contexts.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views on the effectiveness of various responses to ad hominem attacks and the role of education in improving argumentation skills. There is no clear consensus on the best approach to address these issues, and multiple perspectives on the nature of fallacies are presented.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference specific examples and personal anecdotes, indicating a variety of experiences with ad hominem attacks and fallacious reasoning. The discussion includes informal references to philosophical concepts and the potential for formal classifications of certain argumentative techniques.

Who May Find This Useful

Individuals interested in argumentation, logic, philosophy, and the dynamics of online discourse may find this discussion relevant.

Messages
15,696
Reaction score
10,505
A cool video on ad hominim attacks:

An internet troll's favorite way to argue? Ad hominem, of course! This is your guide to spotting bad arguments on the internet and how to fight them.
https://www.wired.com/video/2017/06/how-to-battle-trolling-ad-hominem-attacks-online/
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: RogueOne
Physics news on Phys.org
fresh_42 said:
...
Before I forget, what I really wanted to say is, that the "How to battle" part in the video is a bit short, if not to say completely missing.

I would refer you to Carole King's rendition of: "Smackwater Jack".

You can't argue with [anyone] with [anything set] in their [mind].

ie. You can't, IMHO.

Of course, people will be writing books about it for decades to come, as to how it is possible.

ps. And don't forget to floss.
 
I posted it mostly for the troll attack methodology. Sometimes it's good to see how it's done in order not to fall for the attack and instead so I guess you can say something like:

Well I guess we can agree that's you've lost the argument and are now just angry with my win.

Another way to respond is how the austin a mayor responded to an angry letter about the Alamo Draft Women's Only showing of Wonder Woman:

http://mashable.com/2017/06/01/wonder-woman-screening-austin-mayor/#zyfAvfPD7iqR
 
jedishrfu said:
A cool video on ad hominim attacks:https://www.wired.com/video/2017/06/how-to-battle-trolling-ad-hominem-attacks-online/

Sadly, it's not just internet trolls who use ad hominem, but our national political discourse has degenerated into lots of ad hominem.

As a philosophy minor, I cringe at all the fallacious reasoning out there in the world of politics and in everyday social life.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: RogueOne
jedishrfu said:
I posted it mostly for the troll attack methodology. Sometimes it's good to see how it's done in order not to fall for the attack and instead so I guess you can say something like:

Well I guess we can agree that's you've lost the argument and are now just angry with my win.

Another way to respond is how the austin a mayor responded to an angry letter about the Alamo Draft Women's Only showing of Wonder Woman:

http://mashable.com/2017/06/01/wonder-woman-screening-austin-mayor/#zyfAvfPD7iqR

I've debated politics with a troll before and whenever I called him out on his fallacious reasoning (we're talking textbook philosophy/logic fallacies) he would just ignore it (never acknowledge it) and quickly change the subject to another "problem."

I don't think there's a formal fallacy for this "changing of the subject" technique, but there should be! I've seen it in two specific individuals the past year when we talked politics! Both were masters at it!
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: RogueOne
kyphysics said:
As a philosophy minor, I cringe at all the fallacious reasoning out there in the world of politics and in everyday social life.
Mathematics doesn't help either. Especially famous: propositional fallacies. I sometimes wonder whether they need to study this or whether it comes to them naturally.
kyphysics said:
I don't think there's a formal fallacy for this "changing of the subject" technique
See "red herring" in the section "informal fallacies". I begin to love this page.
 
The only solution is to hammer in logic at an early age and kids can argue with their parents. After a generation or two, we will all become Vulcan.

Ah one can but dream of the possibilities.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: fresh_42

Similar threads

  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
Replies
207
Views
21K
  • · Replies 79 ·
3
Replies
79
Views
13K
Replies
10
Views
5K
Replies
12
Views
4K
  • · Replies 100 ·
4
Replies
100
Views
10K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 105 ·
4
Replies
105
Views
16K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K