• hperrin@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    42
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 day ago

    Even if it’s not an attack of their argument, and is stated simply as a fact, a personal attack does still work to discredit the opponent to any audience, and can therefore be considered a fallacious ad hominem tactic.

    It’s basically poisoning the well. Even though you’re not explicitly saying it, the audience will infer that someone who can justifiably be described as “shit for brains” should not be trusted on the relevant topic. Even someone profoundly stupid can be right, and even someone incredibly intelligent can be wrong.

    That being said, even if someone has been viciously personally attacked, if the attacker has otherwise proved their argument wrong, that’s what truly matters. It does definitely make me think less of someone if they constantly personally attack their opponent, though.

    • logicbomb@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      19 hours ago

      I wonder if it can be ad hominem if it’s a personal attack that technically bolsters your opponent’s argument. For example, if you’re debating a scientist about some scientific subject, and you call them an egghead or a nerd. I think it still counts.

  • Venator@lemmy.nz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    1 day ago

    “shit-for-brains” kinda discredits any and all arguments though doesn’t it?

    • CarbonIceDragon@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      Technically not, since a lack of intelligence doesn’t necessarily imply that something said by a given person is wrong (else an unintelligent person could make things more likely to be wrong by saying something, or would be unable to say that thing if it is true.)

      • logicbomb@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        20 hours ago

        a lack of intelligence doesn’t necessarily imply that something said by a given person is wrong

        This doesn’t seem convincing to me because it’s the exact same sort of criticism you’d make about any other ad hominem statement.

          • logicbomb@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            12 hours ago

            Strangely, I’ve never had someone say that my username doesn’t check out who also explained clearly why they thought that way. I think this is the second time.

            And being called names by strangers online doesn’t really register as anything but noise. I guess if it was in this thread, it would be slightly on topic, but elsewhere, it would probably just lead to reports and blocks.