An ad hominem argument is replying to an argument or a fact by stating some characteristic or belief of the person making the argument, making people disregard that fact or argument. This is a logical fallacy because the reply doesn’t address the fact or argument, instead it targets the person making the argument. Usually used when the opponent is unable to find a fault against an argument. Used commonly and has quite an effect.
Person A makes a claim X
There is something objectionable about person A
Therefore claim X is false
An ad hominem abusive involves abusing and insulting the person making a claim. This can really belittle a claim especially when one points out flaws in the other person’s character even though they don’t have anything to do with the claims. Ad hominem abusive is used as a propaganda tool in political campaigns to influence voters.
“Person B made such a proposal but it can’t be true because he was caught cheating this many times.”
Ad hominem circumstantial involves pointing out the circumstances of the person making a claim to belittle it.
“What do you know about politics? You are too young to vote!”
Ad hominem tu quoque (you too version) is the same as “two wrongs make a right”:
Ad hominem tu quoque (inconsistency version) refers to the claim that the argument a person made is false because he made another argument inconsistent with this one:
“You say aircraft are able to fly because of the laws of physics, but this is false because twenty years ago you also said aircraft fly because of magic.”
Inverse ad hominem is when the person making an argument is praised to add support to his claim. This is the opposite of ad hominem
“The man was smartly dressed and charming, so I’ll accept his argument and vote for him”
–
How often have you observed these being used in your everyday life?
December 30th, 2008 at 7:07 pm
http://www.message_tavarc.com/