Difference between revisions of "Ad hominem"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(→Overview: name-calling) |
(→Overview: some examples) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
==Overview== | ==Overview== | ||
| − | [[Category:Logical Fallacies]]An [[ad hominem]] argument or attack is where the arguer advances an irrelevant criticism of the | + | [[Category:Logical Fallacies]]An [[ad hominem]] argument or attack is where the arguer advances an irrelevant criticism of the source of the opposing argument as evidence or proof that the arguer is correct: |
| + | |||
| + | * "You must be an idiot if you think that." | ||
| + | * "Of course you would say that, being a high-school dropout." | ||
| + | * "What lying commie-traitor blog did you get ''that'' from?" | ||
"Name-calling" is an [[ad hominem]] technique. | "Name-calling" is an [[ad hominem]] technique. | ||
Revision as of 03:51, 23 December 2007
Overview
An ad hominem argument or attack is where the arguer advances an irrelevant criticism of the source of the opposing argument as evidence or proof that the arguer is correct:
- "You must be an idiot if you think that."
- "Of course you would say that, being a high-school dropout."
- "What lying commie-traitor blog did you get that from?"
"Name-calling" is an ad hominem technique.
Reference
- Wikipedia
- The Nizkor Project: |ad hominem| |ad hominem tu quoque|
Related Articles
- An ad hominem attack is often part of an argument by ridicule; the two are closely related.