3 ms·
Calling something an ad hominem attack doesn't make it less valid in the context of the discussion. This is a thread about immigration. If Thiel's opinions on
by markdown 7y ago
Calling something an ad hominem attack doesn't make it less valid in the context of the discussion.
This is a thread about immigration. If Thiel's opinions on immigration are to be considered, then his own behaviour in that regard are absolutely relevant.
- dragonwriter 7y ago> This is a thread about immigration. If Thiel's opinions on immigration are to be considered, then his own behaviour in that regard are absolutely relevant. No, it's not. It might be germane if (1) his behavior demonstrated that he was particylt untrustworthy on this topic and (2) fact claims were being made that could only be accepted based on trusting Thiel. It might also be germane if we were discussing the credibility of his claim to believe in the position he lays out rather than the merits of that position (this is actual a special case of the preceding.) It's also potentially useful as a filter as to whether it's worthwhile to both considering his opinions and participating in the discussion in the first place; many fallacies are pragmatically useful in terms of whittling down the universe of ideas to decide which one are more likely to ve worth spending more time analyzing. But once you jump into the discussion on the merits, well, there is a reason fallacies have been identified.