2 ms·

Ad hominem isn't always a fallacy. Now, I don't know if this analysis of the author is necessarily accurate, but it smacks of plausibility to me because I've se

Ad hominem isn't always a fallacy. Now, I don't know if this analysis of the author is necessarily accurate, but it smacks of plausibility to me because I've seen it before. As people, both men and women, remain single as they get older, they grow more and more accustomed to thinking almost entirely about their own concerns. This kind of self-focus makes it harder and harder to establish and maintain relationships. If you can't get your focus off yourself and off "the relationship" and onto the other person, you're going to have a hard time finding any lasting relationship at all.

ewjordan 17y ago
Ad hominem isn't always a fallacy. Indeed: it's only a fallacy if you try to use it as proof of a claim. As a probability indicator, it's fantastically useful: if person A is right 80% of the time when they make a claim, and person B is right only 20% of the time (assuming all else is equal), then you'd be a damn fool not to incorporate that information into your estimate as to whether something is true: person A is four times as likely to be right, so in a disagreement between the two you should always side with A. I'm getting a little tired of people shouting "ad hominem" every time the credibility of the author is challenged. The fact that someone doesn't believe in evolution absolutely should make me take their thoughts on global warming less seriously; similarly, if someone has displayed an extremely immature, counterproductive, or selfish approach to relationships, you should probably take any relationship advice they give with a serious grain of salt.
jemfinch 17y ago
[Ad hominem](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem) is always a fallacy. If it's not a fallacy, it's just a personal attack.

2 ms·

Ad hominem isn't always a fallacy. Now, I don't know if this analysis of the author is necessarily accurate, but it smacks of plausibility to me because I've se

by jriddycuz 17y ago

ewjordan 17y ago
Ad hominem isn't always a fallacy. Indeed: it's only a fallacy if you try to use it as proof of a claim. As a probability indicator, it's fantastically useful: if person A is right 80% of the time when they make a claim, and person B is right only 20% of the time (assuming all else is equal), then you'd be a damn fool not to incorporate that information into your estimate as to whether something is true: person A is four times as likely to be right, so in a disagreement between the two you should always side with A. I'm getting a little tired of people shouting "ad hominem" every time the credibility of the author is challenged. The fact that someone doesn't believe in evolution absolutely should make me take their thoughts on global warming less seriously; similarly, if someone has displayed an extremely immature, counterproductive, or selfish approach to relationships, you should probably take any relationship advice they give with a serious grain of salt.
jemfinch 17y ago
[Ad hominem](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem) is always a fallacy. If it's not a fallacy, it's just a personal attack.