[lbo-talk] Personal Attack / Ad Hominem Argument

snitsnat snitilicious at tampabay.rr.com
Sat May 21 13:05:24 PDT 2005


At 03:40 PM 5/21/2005, Carrol Cox wrote:


>snitsnat wrote:
> >
> > erm, Carrol, you forgot the fact that someone accused Pug of using lots of
> > drugs when he posts.
>
>That would still be a personal attack

I disagree. Sometimes, personal attacks, when made repeatedly, are an effort to paint the person a certain way. In this case, paint Pub as a drug user and, therefore, his posts are to be dismissed because they are written by a drug-addled person.

I agree with you about the difference and why it's important, but if people repeatedly insult someone like that, they're going to be flamed right back.

And, in any event, the only person here who flamed anyone until my last post was Ian. Would you mind pointing out who used ad hominem when they expressed regret that he left the list. Did I miss a post or something? Most people were really nice.

I don't see the anti-communism that you see in MP's posts. I confess to not reading every post he sends to the list -- my eyes tire quickly! But, last I knew, you didn't read them either. So, maybe Charles can explain it for me.



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list