4 ms·
This is a clear case of the "ad hominem" fallacy. You are saying his argument is wrong because of who he is. Just because he is doing something odd (holed up
by sbf501 4y ago
This is a clear case of the "ad hominem" fallacy.
You are saying his argument is wrong because of who he is.
Just because he is doing something odd (holed up in Russia) doesn't mean he is wrong.
- Gabriel_Martin 4y agoIt's not so clear, in that this fallacy seems to be more accurately what's happening https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu_quoque https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu_quoque
- sbf501 4y agoYes, that is more concise. FTA "This specious reasoning is a special type of ad hominem attack."
- britzkopf 4y agoI believe most judgements share some common edges with some fallacious logical forms, and yet retain some validity. Your argument, for example, has some commonality with what I would call the "fallacy" fallacy, in which one finds an insignificant echo of a fallacy in another's view and dismisses the entirety of what they have to say.
- roflyear 4y agoI think pointing to someone's motivations is not ad hominem.
- sbf501 4y agoIt is if it makes someone reject the argument. This is identical to saying "Climate change doesn't exist because Al Gore flies in airplanes," or "Ralph Nader cannot be a critic of capitalism because he made a million dollars of his books." Motivations have nothing to do with it, that is exactly what an ad hominem attack is. If you reject the argument because of the person's motivations, you are calling an argument false without evaluating the argument itself. That is broken reasoning, which is why the term "fallacy" exists.