Abusive Ad Hominem (Argumentum ad Hominem)
Abusive ad hominem uses insults or derogatory labels in place of relevant support for rejecting a person’s argument. The question is whether the attack addresses the claim or merely distracts from it.
THE IDEA
3.1 ARGUMENTUM AD HOMINEM, ABUSIVE
Argumentum ad hominem is translated as “argument against the person.” The abusive form uses name-calling, slander, or insults as a reason to reject a claim or person without relevant support. Insults can also accompany an otherwise sound argument; their presence alone does not show that its conclusion is false.
Here are some examples of the abusive ad hominem fallacy:
-
Candidate Greenstein is a bleeding-heart, unpatriotic liberal. Therefore, we cannot trust him as our leader.
-
Professor Searle is a real jerk! You should never take his class.
-
How can we trust a rabid Communist to teach our children about American politics?
In these examples, the labels do the work that evidence would need to do. A person’s conduct or reliability can be relevant to a hiring, teaching, or testimony decision, but an insult alone does not establish those facts. Ask what evidence supports the judgment and how it bears on the issue.
When to use it
In a political campaign, one candidate repeatedly calls the opponent a 'liar' and 'corrupt' without providing evidence, instead of debating policy differences.
During a workplace meeting, a manager dismisses an employee's suggestion by saying, 'You're always complaining and never have good ideas,' rather than evaluating the merit of the suggestion.
In an online forum, a user responds to a well-reasoned argument by attacking the writer's spelling or personal life, shifting focus away from the content.
In a courtroom, an attorney attempts to discredit a witness by calling them a 'convicted felon' or 'unreliable person' unrelated to the testimony.
FROM THEORY TO EVERYDAY LIFE
In practice
Political Candidate Attack
Candidate Greenstein is a bleeding-heart, unpatriotic liberal. Therefore, we cannot trust him as our leader.
Professor Disparagement
Professor Searle is a real jerk! You should never take his class.
Teacher Character Assassination
How can we trust a rabid Communist to teach our children about American politics?
A MOMENT TO REFLECT
Put it to work.
During a recent debate or heated discussion, did you notice any personal attacks that replaced substantive arguments? How did that affect the outcome?
When you encounter an abusive ad hominem in political commentary, what strategies can you use to refocus the discussion on the actual issues?
Think of a time you might have inadvertently used an insult instead of addressing a point. How could you have responded more logically?
CONTINUE THE CONVERSATION
Source texts
- Informal Logical Fallacies A Brief Guide