The Ad Hominem Fallacy

[RBuckminsterFuller]

So... what's he supposed to be sucking anyway?

[Electronite1337]

1) Ray Comfort says banana is a proof of intelligent design

2) We all know Ray Comfort is a cretard

Therefore:

3) Ray should shove the banana, where the sun does not shine.

[Traveler246]

@PhilosophyFreak You should make an addendum to this video that talks about appeal to authority.

[Traveler246]

@ElasticGiraffe

[SouthernersSax]

@Cookiecutter87 Remember that we're on the internet, where louder shouting and more obscenities makes your argument more correct.

You dumb whore :P

[JimmyJump007]

@Cookiecutter87

that's true

[MrShogunfish]

Dude you are so boring...

Also, I am pretty sure that if someone is racist that does allow you to disregard their ideas about racial differences.

[sorengrebs]

@MrShogunfish which is exactly what he said in the video...

[APWPerkins]

@MrShogunfish You can reject their arguments, but you should reject them based on the problems with the arguments themselves rather than the qualities of the person giving them. If Nelson Mandela suddenly began arguing that White People are inferior, we wouldn't accept it beacuse he is "good", we would reject it based on the argument. We should also reject arguments from "bad" people based on the argument, not on their qualities.

[MeneerVerspiller]

@MrShogunfish I think you should watch the video again. You are making an ad hominem right now.

[thecuriousapple]

EXAMPLE:

(1) William Dembski argues that modern biology supports the idea that there is an intelligent designer who created life.

(2) Dembski would say that because he’s religious.

Therefore:

(3) Modern biology doesn’t support intelligent design.

[ElasticGiraffe]

@thecuriousapple That's more of a genetic fallacy. :P

[SexyJane28]

INSULTS ARE NOT AD HOMINEM. They are simply insults. Look up PLOVER.

[StabbyRaccoon]

Anyother dimension to the Hitler example is that if Hitler's arguments were good, then he would be perfectly justified in being a murderous anti-semite, so we can't say that his arguments are bad because of what he did, his arguments are intended to justify what he did. Of course they're blatantly bad, but some people don't see it that way, and if we're going to convince them then we have to address the arguments.

[wideosvatcher]

this video sucks its complete b.s........letters arent yellow damnit.

[250garbear]

@jshowa4 That's why it's important to have a good understanding of the subject matter you are arguing. If you are knowledgeable on the subject (usually a good idea before engaging in argument) then someone using lies, exaggerations, etc will be easy to spot. I never judge whether an argument is true or false based on the morality of the arguer, I simply look at whether or not the assertions they are making are true or false. This is where knowledge of the subject matter becomes critical.

[manoman0]

@250garbear you're wrong because you suck! =D

[Siva3Enthroned]

@jshowa4 Yes but if they are lying expose them objectively via logic and the actual evidence, simply accusing them of lying is baseless and avoids the actual subject of debate. Hope this helped, Hare Krisna.

[WolfgangNS]

Those are parentheses, not brackets :)

[dulcetAirman]

Agnes Gonxha Bojaxhiu (aka "Mother Theresa") isn't really better than Adolf Hitler. Why would you take her as an example if you already used Hitler?

[TairyGreen89]

@dulcetAirman I concur 

[DKshad0w]

Using Ad Homs isn't a logical fallacy! Your FACE is a logical fallacy.

[tifforo1]

This video was made by a freak, therefore everything in it is wrong ;-)

[thesparitan]

I love this channel. Thanks alot I needed this video to refer people to because so many people I talk to get this one wrong. It is the most well know fallacies and the most misunderstood one as well.

Fantastic work

[zachflame123]

You could suck at collecting information, or handling it once its gathered.



[WarThemedRevolution]

@zachflame123 It may be that one's sucking when it comes to collecting information and handling it once it has been gathered has led to a flaw in that individual's argument, but then the proper approach would be to point out the flaw and not the personal characteristic which caused him to make that mistake.

[Nukefuzion]

@marredsun Ad Hominem is often occurs in "politics" I'm afraid. If you want an example, go look around for some "debates". You just have to look.

@subarkts Marred is quite correct on his words. I don't know who you are personally, but the mere fact that you take conspiracy theories to the word is a little unsettling. I myself have a friend who believes in CTs... I don't hold it against him, but sometimes it makes me laugh and cringe when his "ideas" are indeed just regurgitations of others :(

[Forkroute]

excellent video. 

[natepepin09]

Abe Lincoln argues that McDonalds makes the best burgers

Honest Abe does not lie

Therefore McDonalds makes the best burgers

[marredsun]

@subarkts Whatever, man. Your argument is bad because YOU SUCK!

[Ant1Live]

This video is useless because PhilosophyFreak is an idiot.

(J/K :p)

[thesparitan]

@Ant1Live really you think philosophyfreak is an idiot? Sorry but this comment tells us more about your intelligence then his.

[Ant1Live]

@thesparitan 1) Go ahead, worship your idol philosophyfreak. You know as little about his intelligence as you do of mine. Assumptions are the wrenches in the gears of logic.

2) Did you not READ my comment? Do you not understand the concept of IRONY?

[thesparitan]

@Ant1Live Whatever.

[Ant1Live]

@thesparitan If "whatever" is the conclusion, then what are the premises?

[splashlog01]

@Ant1Live

You shut him up!.

Here, have a cigar

[greenghost2008]

@subarkts because it is so emotional.

[marredsun]

@subarkts Looking at your channel you're obviously an easily-taken-in conspiracy theorist; your opinion of politics is way skewed. You're nothing but a gullible follower masquerading as a free thinker. If you knew anything about politics or logic you'd know that the Ad Hominem fallacy rarely occurs in politics.

[MasonicEyes]

@marredsun Well, maybe not. How is it not ad hominum when they spend a lot of well wasted time talking about a candidates religion, which is completely arbitrary to the running of a country. Such issues like abortion, or gay marriage which does not directly influence "politics" more of an influence of culture. Perhaps you have a better understanding then I do.

[marredsun]

@MasonicEyes Look, you say that as hominem occurs in politics, but you support freemasonry which either aids or is made up of humanoid reptiles who control the world by replacing world leaders. You and your kind are evil, evil things are wrong, therefore, you are wrong. Ad Hominem never occurs in politics. Or on YouTube. Or in real life. Neither does equivocation.

[MasonicEyes]

@marredsun Humanoid reptiles? and I don't support freemasonry, I collect Freemason antiques...

LOL HUMANOID REPTILES? I want the drugs you are on, my dear sir.

[supercowmanguy]

@marredsun ahahaha, well played.