4 ms·
This phenomenon applies to any widely held ideology: if it weren't robust to challenges, it wouldn't remain widely adopted (for some subtle definition of "robus
by cle 2y ago
This phenomenon applies to any widely held ideology: if it weren't robust to challenges, it wouldn't remain widely adopted (for some subtle definition of "robust").
Ironically, dismissing an argument with an ad hominem--like calling it a "trained response"--is also a mechanism that makes ideologies resilient.
- kubb 2y agoYou might be under the impression that I'm trying to argue myself (you mention "dismissing an argument") and employ an ad hominem as a rhetorical tool. Not so! I'm well aware that discussion or debate isn't an effective way of having a person question their ideology. Ironically, by ascribing this dark pattern to me you could also be seen as employing an ad hominem, because it casts me as a dishonest, disrespectful person. Alas, I am a human full of contradictions and vices. If it helps you maintain your mental composure, do feel comforted by my perceived malice :)
- sympil 2y agoI don’t believe this qualifies as an ad hominem. The person was not attacking the individual but rather making an observation about the dynamics of ideological thinking.
- cle 2y agoThe ad hominem is assuming that the person suffers from mindless ideological thinking, and that they're parroting something they heard instead of using their brain. To paraphrase, "yeah well you're just a dumb ideologue...aren't they fascinating?".