"Research"

submitted by FediNetizen from i.imgur.com

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]FediNetizen[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

This is not an ad hominem. How is it that the tards on this site can't even understand a handful of basic terms even when they're referenced all the time. An ad hominem is an attack on the character of the one making the argument.

That aside, even "anti-vax" could be replaced with any other group, and it's still just an observation that you're repeating often-used lines by that particular group. It's only with the tacit acknowledgement that most people (correctly) think of anti-vaxxers as conspiratorial anti-science quacks that the phrase can be interpreted as some kind of attack.

[–]ReeferMadness 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Calling someone a conspiracy theorist as an argument is attacking the speaker instead of the argument. What part of that don't you understand?

[–]FediNetizen[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

They weren't doing that, and it's only when this is done instead of addressing the actual points that it qualifies as an ad hominem. If I refute your point, and separately call you a tard for making "such a stupid claim", it's not an ad hominem, as the argument doesn't rely on the attack on your character. It is obnoxious and dickish, so it should be reserved for when the other guy is also being obnoxious, but it isn't an ad hominem.

The exact quote that you took issue with was stating that the person was using cliches that come from bad sources. How is what they actually said an ad hominem?

[–]ReeferMadness 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

What makes the sources bad? That is a baseless claim.

What are you doing in an ad hominem other than making the claim that the argument is wrong because the source (the speaker) is a bad source?

It's literally the same thing but you can't seem to put two and two together.