3 ms·
Do you have a real argument (i.e. attacking the author's claims?) or just ad hominem?
by tomp 3y ago
Do you have a real argument (i.e. attacking the author's claims?) or just ad hominem?
- kevingadd 3y ago"ad hominem" is an attack on a person instead of the positions they take. The post you're replying to quite literally is discussing the person's position on COVID which would naturally influence their COVID-related work.
- omginternets 3y ago“Discussing the person’s position” starts with discussing their reasoning. You don’t get to take the conclusion that someone has reached as a basis for dismissing the reasoning that led them there.
- giraffe_lady 3y ago[flagged]
- woodpanel 3y agoafter all, wasn‘t „ad hominem“ more or less the overall strategy towards any criticism of a country’s covid policy?
- spookthesunset 3y agoWell, that and an appeal to authority. The entire narrative depended on appeals to “the experts”. Where “the experts” were the doomiest of doomsday “experts”. Anything other that “covid is literally the only problem we need to solve for” was all that was allowed. If you dared to question “the experts” and their idiotic plans you were immediately tossed into the alt-right wacko bucket. Didn’t matter what your credentials were or anything. Only doomsday “experts” were allowed a voice. To this day I still can’t believe how many people went along with that crap for almost three years.
- tomp 3y agoNo, many people had concrete suggestions (no lockdowns, open schools) substantiated with concrete arguments & facts (e.g. children are least vulnerable, the virus isn't that severe except in elderly) and pointed out concrete failures in leadership (e.g. Fauci lying about funding GOF research, big tech censorship).