Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: jda

It’s not just the left. Ad hominems are the domain of anyone with a poorly thought out or indefensible position that relies on faith, not facts.

Try disagreeing with a Birther, for instance. If you don’t sip the kool aid, they’ll immediately call you an Obama plant or a troll. They’ll have a few facts handy, but their appetite for more drops off fast if it contradicts what they want to hear.

It’s no different than ‘Lower taxes for the rich are racist’ argument I’ve heard from a liberal co-worker. There’s no intelligent way to argue this; either you believe it or you don’t. If you try to argue it, then your motives as a human being become suspect, and the Believer has no need to treat you or your words with respect.

It’s faith masquerading as intellectual laziness. That’s why they attack right away on a personal level. They know perfectly well that thinking the issue further through is not helpful to maintaining the logical integrity of their beliefs, and in fact leads to heresy.


17 posted on 05/19/2011 8:52:23 AM PDT by Steel Wolf ("There are moderate Muslims, but Islam itself is not moderate." - Ibn Warraq)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Steel Wolf
What you're describing is, I believe, the fallacy of "begging the question at issue", or simply "begging the question", a.k.a. arguing from the conclusion or circumlocution. It's distinct from the ad hominem fallacy.
25 posted on 05/19/2011 9:33:45 AM PDT by LearsFool ("Thou shouldst not have been old, till thou hadst been wise.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

To: Steel Wolf

“Try disagreeing with a Birther, for instance. If you don’t sip the kool aid, they’ll immediately call you an Obama plant or a troll. They’ll have a few facts handy, but their appetite for more drops off fast if it contradicts what they want to hear.”

Congratulations - you have succeeded in committing an impressive number of fallacies in relatively few words. Let me help you clean this up.
Try for starters

A Practical Study of Argument
by Trudy Govier
http://www.amazon.com/Practical-Study-Argument-Trudy-Govier/dp/0495603406/ref=wl_it_dp_o?ie=UTF8&coliid=I1O92ABB34Q5RM&colid=3R6M7KESRKYFW

Attacking Faulty Reasoning: A Practical Guide to Fallacy-Free Arguments
by T. Edward Damer
http://www.amazon.com/Attacking-Faulty-Reasoning-Practical-Fallacy-Free/dp/0495095060/ref=wl_it_dp_o?ie=UTF8&coliid=I1PD8TIFRX2F3L&colid=3R6M7KESRKYFW

Theories of Truth: A Critical Introduction
by Richard L. Kirkham
http://www.amazon.com/Theories-Truth-Introduction-Richard-Kirkham/dp/0262611082/ref=wl_it_dp_o?ie=UTF8&coliid=I11RK9B14AV0W4&colid=3R6M7KESRKYFW


31 posted on 05/19/2011 11:36:31 AM PDT by PeteCat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson