|
|
|
|
|
by jlgreco
4780 days ago
|
|
No, that he is whining. He isn't being questioned because of his name; he is being questioned because he is whining. The quip about his name is not an ad hominem because the quip is immaterial to the argument. There is no "you should question this because his name is Foo", rather "you should question this because he is acting Fooish, which incidentally sounds similar to his name." Immature, but not an ad hominem. |
|
That's backwards: ad hominem attacks are considered bad precisely because they're not relevant to the argument. Note that the GP's argument is exactly the opposite: that the attacks aren't ad hominem because they are material in this case.
If you're saying that the original line wasn't meant as support of their argument and therefore doesn't qualify for examination for materiality, I'm finding that hard to swallow too, e.g. "You're wrong, and also incidentally--totally as aside, seriously--you're an idiot."