Ad Hominem literally means “to the man”, and it is a logical fallacy that occurs when an argument attacks the person making the argument instead of the argument itself.
Remember, someone with wrong motives just might have the right answer, so make sure you’re debating the person’s argument/answer and not his character. Attacking someone as a Creationist or an Evolutionist is just a way of distracting attention from a valid argument.
Well, sometimes.
You see? There are little exceptions to every rule, if you’ll excuse my quoting Esme Cullen ;)
It’s not unfair or Ad Hominem to point out bias in an argument. If someone insists that cracking one’s knuckles isn’t unhealthy, then it is not necessarily fallacious or wrong to point out that he cracks his knuckles constantly. However, assuming that just because he is biased means that he is wrong, that IS a fallacy.
You see, we are all guilty of this at some point or another. Christians are reluctant to give credit to evidence that seems to contradict Bible passages, and sometimes use Ad Hominem or other fallacies to distract from their opponent’s argument. Evolutionists are reluctant to give credit to evidence that seems to suggest that natural selection doesn’t do all Darwin claimed.
We all have a tendency to believe what we want to believe, and Ad Hominem is a great crutch for us when we’re doing that. For example, a business owner might see a study that claims facts that could be detrimental to his company. He might attack the authors of the study, claiming that they are just out to get businessmen and cannot be trusted. Some other zealots might claim that the businessman knew what he was doing was wrong, and that he did it anyway just because the world of business is out to get people.
Ad Hominem arguments are everywhere, we need to watch out for them. This isn’t really a fallacy that you should be aware of in others, it’s more one that you should be aware of in yourself. When our beliefs are challenged, it is a natural reaction to push back and defend our beliefs. That’s fine, but only if it’s done in a classy, fair way.
Also remember that exposing bias is not Ad Hominem. Ad Hominem occurs only when you point out something about your opponent’s character for the sole purpose of distraction from his argument.
Recognize and acknowledge bias, get beyond it, and evaluate the evidence fairly. That is the only way to get anywhere in a debate.
I agree completely. How mature are we if our religious, political, or moral points are reduced to attacking your opponent a personal level?
ReplyDeleteThank you! You're right, it's sad how we let petty, personal attacks get in the way of real debating. I know I'm guilty of it, too; it's something I really have to watch out for in myself.
ReplyDeleteSo pointing out that someone is obviously biased in one direction or another is not Ad Hominem, but then going on to say something along the lines of "It's idots like you who..." WOULD be Ad Hominem?
ReplyDeleteHmmmmmmm..... Glad we don't see any of THAT on here;P
Haha, correct :)
ReplyDeleteI say things like that when I feel passionately about an issue. For instance, I feel insulted when people say homosexuality is a choice and they do not need nor deserve rights. I also feel the same when people say no one should have a choice to have an abortion if they want/need it. I do like this post though. It is only human to insult one another when tempers get high.
ReplyDeleteWell, unfortunately it's not considered an Ad Hominem if you are offended at someone's opinions; that fallacy only comes into play when someone is attacking you or your character, not your point of view.
ReplyDeleteI was just saying that there are some issues that I feel very passionate about and think that there is only one right answer. Take gay marriage. By disagreeing, your saying that people who are different should not have equal rights, that they should not be treated with the same respect and that they are worse than us because of something that is not their fault or choice.
ReplyDeletePLEASE don't start that again, you have made it quite clear that you have your opinion and are sticking to it.
ReplyDeleteAnd in any gentlman's book, feeling passionate about something is not an excuse to insult people, that is a liberal excuse to throw a tantrum whenever you don't like someone's opinion.
Actually, I see it as more of a conservative excuse. And I'm not "starting that again". I feel personally insulted with some issues, therefore insults come back to you. When you say things like homosexuality is a choice, you insult me, homosexuals, and people all across the world you believe in equal rights for all.
ReplyDeleteWell you can feel as insulted as much as you like, but as long as you are acting like a rude little two-year-old, insulting anyone who disagrees with you, don’t expect anyone to take your arguments for anything more than the whining of said two-year-old.
ReplyDeleteIt’s sad that you can’t have a discussion without insulting others because of your “passion” but if you insist on being that way, that is your prerogative. Just don’t expect me to put up with it.
Only human? Now we are back to square one again. Cannibals think it is "only human" to eat their fallen foes, but we don't consider that ok do we?
Being human is rising above the temptation to do what comes naturally.
With your mentality, I would be justified in hunting you down and brutally murdering you just because I felt like it. If I could get away with it then why not?
Is it pleasant thinking that any good deed you do has no more value than if you did nothing?
Do you like the idea of a world where morality is relative, and your evil could be another person’s good?
That mentality led to the Holocaust, and the rise of Nazi Germany, one of modern civilization’s darkest periods. Hitler was only trying to advance evolution further, because, hey, if there was no one bigger than him that would stop him, then why not?
Now you will probably either say that while you DO believe in evolution, you also believe in some vague New Age theory that involves a higher power that dictates some sort of morality that you “feel” (see my post on how anyone can feel anything), which will make me nauseous. Or you will go back to your mantra of “Religious nut! Religious nut!” and accuse ME of being a Nazi (another favorite tactic of liberals) Which would make me…nauseous?
Or, you might just see the hopelessness your belief creates, the utter lack of purpose it encourages, and open your mind enough to ask both yourself and me some questions, with the intent of seriously investigating the dogma you have so willingly swallowed.
That might make me faint.
I'm the insulting one? You just insulted me in your comment! Hey, I know I mudsling, but I also provide facts which is something you do not seem to. Arguing with you makes my head hurt. You can't look past your own beliefs. And conservatives always call liberal Nazis, not the other way around. Glen Beck is always ranting about those liberal socialist nazis, so don't think we use that! I used to be like you. I was a right wing creaionist. Until I took a closer look at things. The blindfold has been lifted for me. I only wish that it happens for you so that you to can see another side of things. Right now, I'm not sure if I'll respond.Myabe you could try using a civil attitude as well.
ReplyDeleteSorry, but this is frightfully ironic. I'm actually chuckling right now. Imagine that. Isn't this post about Ad Hominemn? And aren't we insulting each other instead of debating a topic? I don't think accusing Alex of "acting like a little two-year-old" or any of that is being very considerate toward the post.
ReplyDeleteAgain, Kendra, it's a good post and in some ways a more important topic than many political issues.
Exactly! That was what I was trying to explain. Calling me a two year old and then saying "but I never insult!" is not right nor true. At least have the coruage to admit it like I did! I always respect people more who admit their faults. For instance, I did not respect President Bush because he really never came out and said "I may have made a mistake or twenty."
ReplyDeleteIf I offended you with my example than I apologize. That was not my intent, although I can see how you would find it insulting.
ReplyDeleteRather than insult you personally, I was trying to make a point, and used a two-year-old as an example. If you insist upon it, I can find something else to use as an example, but I really do not see much need for it.
If you had a disagreement with a two-year-old (over ANYTHING) and they began to call you names, would it make you consider them MORE or LESS mature than one who did not?
In the same way (or perhaps more so since I would expect most adults to display at least the maturity, maybe slightly higher, than that of a two –year-old), would you not consider it immature and childish if, when attempting to debate with a grown man, he began insulting you and ACTING like a child? Would you it make you want to consider their argument, or would it make you want to throw up your hands in disgust and leave them to their delusions?
I know that none of what you have said on this blog has come anywhere near the severity of the example I have used, and I commend you for that. I am simply trying to show you that insulting others during a debate is detrimental to communication, not beneficial.
A perfect illustration would be the aforementioned example, I was not even trying to insult you, yet the offensive nature of my analogy caused you to ignore all my other points and questions, which, if you are not too upset, I hope you will still address. My “insult”, unintentional though it was, caused you not to listen to anything I said.
And for the record, I had never even heard of Glen Beck before you brought him up, and I agree that Bush made many mistakes, I just might disagree with what some of those mistakes might have been.
To tell the truth, I do not know ANYONE who really thinks Bush made only a few mistakes, Conservative or Liberal.
Really? I thought that was you who said they were always watching him. Sorry, my mistake. I was insulted by things you said, which was why I appared to be insulting. Actually, looking back you mae me out a little worse than I was. Plus, saying you're acting like a two year old sounds like an insult, and it really isn't a good comparision. If you're going to say that I whine like a two year old than I shall start too. Surprisingly, there are still people out there who want to preserve the "George Bush legacy!" I actually ifn it shocking that the lowest his approval rates dropped was down to somewhere in the 30s. I thought it'd be a little lower than that.
ReplyDeleteI already provided an alternate example with my own comparison, did you not see that?
ReplyDeleteI am tired of trying to explain something as basic as good manners to you. Insult me all you like, but please address the points I brought up while you do it!
I didn't insult you in any way, sorry if it sounded like that. I was not asking for a second comparision, I was just stated that a two year old was a pretty bad one. I don't need you to explain 'good manners' to me. I already have a good understanding of those and I really haven't insulted you as much as you give me credit for.
ReplyDeleteI see Ad Hominem arguments too often... I never knew what they were called, though. Insulting someone on a personal level, whether it be because of political or religious views, appearance, or anything like that, especially when debating about something completely unrelated, always seemed kind of... Well, pathetic to me. Even though I wouldn't be surprised if I did it often... Nice post, like always!
ReplyDeleteAugh... The argument (if I may call it that) in the comments confuses me... Everyone here makes me feel as if I have the intelligence of a ten year old.
Yeah, it's annoying, isn't it?
ReplyDeleteHaha, you do not have the intellegence of a ten-year-old!