Important Difference
Important Difference
28 comments
-
-
"shit-for-brains" kinda discredits any and all arguments though doesn't it?
-
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.)
-
The bonus panel explains why it doesn't.
-
Oh I forgot to open the page to see it, thanks for the reminder 😅
-
-
-
The sequel to https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/phenom we have all been waiting for
-
"strawman"
does not eleborate further, thinks they won, leaves
-
How to win debates on the Internet 101.
In 201, you learn how to do it with more Latin.
-
-
why doesn't the guy on the right have any ears
-
The shit would leak
-
-
I feel this argument applies in many situations
-
First of all, I’m a fucking shit for brains idiot. Second of all, presents highly intelligent nuanced opinion.
-
I stand forever enlightened
-
Further, the fallacy fallacy states that even if you did it doesn't make the other side "the automatic winner because the other guy was mean."
-
I thought that was the "neener neener" fallacy
-
-
-
But an insult is not an argument. And he himself calls it an argument, implying that he is trying to discredit, thereby making it ad hominem.
-
28 comments
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.