1. Standard memberDeepThought
    Losing the Thread
    Quarantined World
    Joined
    27 Oct '04
    Moves
    87415
    15 May '15 23:41
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    No, that is not an ad hominem.
    Yes it is RJ, she's attacking his point on the grounds that he himself is not a Christian rather than dealing with the substance - that is what makes it an ad hominem argument.
  2. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    13644
    16 May '15 03:022 edits
    Originally posted by DeepThought
    Yes it is RJ, she's attacking his point on the grounds that he himself is not a Christian rather than dealing with the substance - that is what makes it an ad hominem argument.
    She simply informed him that one cannot expect to understand what one does not know. This was in response to his attack on Christians and their faith. 😏
  3. Joined
    28 Oct '05
    Moves
    34587
    16 May '15 03:08
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    She didn't say anything about him not being a Christian. And she did not attack him either. She simply informed him that one cannot expect to understand what one does not know. 😏
    Claiming someone isn't able to understand, INSTEAD of addressing the point, is an ad hominem.
  4. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    13644
    16 May '15 03:201 edit
    Originally posted by FMF
    Claiming someone isn't able to understand, INSTEAD of addressing the point, is an ad hominem.
    She did say he was not of that faith and that was the reason he did not understand. But I don't see that as an ad hominem attack, because it does not attack him as being too stupid to understand, but just informing him of the reason he did not understand. If you don't know something, how can one understand it? That does address the point.
  5. Standard memberDeepThought
    Losing the Thread
    Quarantined World
    Joined
    27 Oct '04
    Moves
    87415
    16 May '15 03:55
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    She did say he was not of that faith and that was the reason he did not understand. But I don't see that as an ad hominem attack, because it does not attack him as being too stupid to understand, but just informing him of the reason he did not understand. If you don't know something, how can one understand it? That does address the point.
    The ad hominem fallacy is wider than rabid insults. We are not accusing Suzianne of impoliteness, we are accusing her of failing to address the substance of his post.
  6. Joined
    28 Oct '05
    Moves
    34587
    16 May '15 04:19
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    She did say he was not of that faith and that was the reason he did not understand. But I don't see that as an ad hominem attack, because it does not attack him as being too stupid to understand, but just informing him of the reason he did not understand. If you don't know something, how can one understand it? That does address the point.
    No, it doesn't address the point. It avoids the point by using an ad hominem instead.
  7. Account suspended
    Joined
    26 Aug '07
    Moves
    38239
    16 May '15 08:37
    Originally posted by DeepThought
    The ad hominem fallacy is wider than rabid insults. We are not accusing Suzianne of impoliteness, we are accusing her of failing to address the substance of his post.
    She as far as I can discern very rarely if ever addresses the substance of a post.
  8. Account suspended
    Joined
    26 Aug '07
    Moves
    38239
    16 May '15 08:441 edit
    The post that was quoted here has been removed
    Thank you Duchess64, you have crystallised in words what is a rather common problem that being that people assume other people think like they do and that any divergence from that stance is a personal affront to their dignity. I rarely read Suzziannes posts any more because she very rarely if ever has any substance.
  9. SubscriberGhost of a Duke
    Resident of Planet X
    The Ghost Chamber
    Joined
    14 Mar '15
    Moves
    28729
    16 May '15 11:47
    Originally posted by FMF
    No, it doesn't address the point. It avoids the point by using an ad hominem instead.
    Bloody hell. Keep putting it off, but am going to have to go google the meaning of ad hominem.
  10. Joined
    31 May '06
    Moves
    1795
    16 May '15 12:36
    Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
    Bloody hell. Keep putting it off, but am going to have to go google the meaning of ad hominem.
    An Ad Hominem logical fallacy is where you say something along the lines of;

    "You are a stinky person, and therefore your argument is wrong".

    Saying "You are a stinky person and your argument is wrong" is not an Ad Hominem.
    [Nor is it an argument]

    Saying "You are a stinky person" is not an Ad Hominem, it's just an insult.

    An Ad Hominem is in the form of an argument where the person making the fallacy
    accuses another of being wrong BECAUSE of some supposed fault or trait that makes
    them incapable of being correct. And this is done INSTEAD of dealing with the substance
    of the argument.

    For example: "You're wrong because you're an idiot" is an Ad Hominem fallacy because
    being an idiot [even if true] does not stop you from being correct.

    However saying "You're an idiot if you think that's a valid position because..." is not an Ad Hominem
    because you are not claiming they are wrong because they are an idiot.


    http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_hominem
  11. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    13644
    16 May '15 12:52
    Originally posted by DeepThought
    The ad hominem fallacy is wider than rabid insults. We are not accusing Suzianne of impoliteness, we are accusing her of failing to address the substance of his post.
    I believe she was addressing what finnegan said, not why Christians are under attack.
  12. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    13644
    16 May '15 13:002 edits
    Originally posted by googlefudge
    An Ad Hominem logical fallacy is where you say something along the lines of;

    "You are a stinky person, and therefore your argument is wrong".

    Saying "You are a stinky person and your argument is wrong" is not an Ad Hominem.
    [Nor is it an argument]

    Saying "You are a stinky person" is not an Ad Hominem, it's just an insult.

    An Ad Hominem is in ...[text shortened]... hey are wrong because they are an idiot.


    http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_hominem
    But what Suzianne said is not an ad hominen logical fallacy, because it is true that one cannot expect to understand what one does not know. I also do not see it as an insult to inform one of the truth.

    Telling finnegan that he doesn't understand the Christian faith because he is not of that faith is an answer to his statement based on Suzianne's belief that one cannot expect to understand what one does not know, which seems true enough and logical to me. 😏
  13. SubscriberGhost of a Duke
    Resident of Planet X
    The Ghost Chamber
    Joined
    14 Mar '15
    Moves
    28729
    16 May '15 14:40
    Originally posted by googlefudge
    An Ad Hominem logical fallacy is where you say something along the lines of;

    "You are a stinky person, and therefore your argument is wrong".

    Saying "You are a stinky person and your argument is wrong" is not an Ad Hominem.
    [Nor is it an argument]

    Saying "You are a stinky person" is not an Ad Hominem, it's just an insult.

    An Ad Hominem is in ...[text shortened]... hey are wrong because they are an idiot.


    http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_hominem
    Thanks old chap.

    Was saved from google by googlefudge.

    Now, who's going to save me from the fudge?
  14. Cape Town
    Joined
    14 Apr '05
    Moves
    52945
    16 May '15 14:591 edit
    Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
    Now, who's going to save me from the fudge?
    chrome-extension://dhdgffkkebhmkfjojejmpbldmpobfkfo/ask.html?aid=_20f4a2f8-895d-4a0a-9753-4bf25e7d1f8f

    I have never tried it, but I am told it can hide posts by people whose posts hurt your eyes.
  15. SubscriberGhost of a Duke
    Resident of Planet X
    The Ghost Chamber
    Joined
    14 Mar '15
    Moves
    28729
    16 May '15 15:24
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    chrome-extension://dhdgffkkebhmkfjojejmpbldmpobfkfo/ask.html?aid=_20f4a2f8-895d-4a0a-9753-4bf25e7d1f8f

    I have never tried it, but I am told it can hide posts by people whose posts hurt your eyes.
    i find that sunglasses and a good rioja does the trick.
Back to Top

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.I Agree