{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
2/14/2017 2:53:52 PM
7
People forget that ad hominem is not equivalent to insulting sometimes.
English
-
The only way you could use an insult to further a debate is in the sense of an ad hominem though, so I don't see why people do it for other reasons. If I say you're a hypocrite because you're advocating one thing but there's x time when you did something else, that makes sense in trying to further the argument even though it's an ad hominem. But if I just call you an idiot then all that does is (at the most) make you feel bad.
-
But in the terms of the argument itself, a pure insult changes nothing and has no detrimental effect. Your argument is still valid or invalid regardless of whether you insult someone or not. Thus there isn't anything inherently wrong with insulting someone in an argument that isn't trivial.
-
If it doesn't do anything, why do it? The whole reason these rules of debating were devised in the first place were because people wanted to make the process as stripped as possible of mud slinging and as much about the logical flow of the opposing arguments as possible. Insults get in the way, they can cause people to get mad, and generally detract from the argument, especially when both parties start doing it and the whole thing descends into just calling each other names. How is that a good thing?
-
Nothing I said has anything to do with whether or not someone [i]should[/i] do it. The point is that it is possible to insult someone without bringing fault into your argument. I'd say people who shut down a valid argument because of an insult (perceived or real) on the false basis of "ad hominem!" are entirely at fault and are arguably worse than the party doing the insulting.
-
[quote]I'd say people who shut down a valid argument because of an insult (perceived or real) on the false basis of "ad hominem!" are entirely at fault and are arguably worse than the party doing the insulting.[/quote]I would consider that an ad hominem in and of itself. If you think someone is insulting you, but they're not saying your argument is invalid because of it, then your cry of ad hominem is an attack on their person and saying that's grounds for their argument being invalid.
-
Not really. It would be fallacious, clearly, but not an ad hominem, since the target of the claim is not you but the "argument". That is regardless of the fact that said "argument" isn't actually an argument.
-
[quote]argument argument argument argument argument argument argument argument argument argument argument argument argument argument argument [/quote]what that reads like. You're probably right though, whatever it was you were saying.
