The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Argumentum ad hominem > Comments

Argumentum ad hominem : Comments

By Jennifer Wilson, published 1/2/2011

Writing is a creative act between the writer and the reader. Ad hominem comment threads brutalise that relationship.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. ...
  8. 9
  9. 10
  10. 11
  11. All
suzeonline, a writer puts him or herself at the mercy of anybody whenever they publish anything.

Fortunately for the reading public, there are plenty of writers still willing to put up with it.

If every writer who had been personally abused took your advice, you would have nothing left to read.

What is your objection to the reader/commenter taking responsibility for what they say and how they say it?

What is your objection to a civilized space where nobody personally abuses anybody?

Would you prefer writers stop writing because they're fed up copping abuse, or is it better that readers refrain from abuse in the first place?

Why do you think that because I publish my writing, I must accept being personally abused?

Is this a requirement for the practice of any other profession?
Posted by briar rose, Tuesday, 1 February 2011 12:35:16 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
No, that is not really what I meant Briar Rose.

I guess what I was really trying to say is that one person's feelings of being 'personally abused' may not necessarily be another person's feelings.

If someone writes a controversial article, say for instance, one on domestic violence from a womans point of view, then they would expect to cop a certain amount of flack.

I don't believe in personal attacks on the writer's looks, or on their dress sense etc, as that should not impact on the subject of their writing.
If however, a writer puts themselves out there as a radical feminist, or let's everyone know their sexual preferences, or their religion, or their ethnicity or any other usually private information about their life, then they should expect some comments on that.

From my experience, writers usually give as good as they get, and express themselves so much better than most when they do :)
It is only human nature after all.

So no, I do not condone extremely personal attacks on anyone.
Posted by suzeonline, Tuesday, 1 February 2011 1:16:42 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Suze,

Comments about " .... any other usually private information about their life .... " by definition have nothing to do with discussions, so really should be out of bounds for criticism. To attack someone on those grounds would be ad hominem, I would have thought, unless the person whose characteristics were being criticised had been trying to make a point using that sort of information.

Of course, the right of free speech must include speech or writing which is abusive, offensive and obnoxious. Otherwise, what could constitute free speech ? Only stuff which offends no-one ?

But that's another story.

Joe
Posted by Loudmouth, Tuesday, 1 February 2011 3:43:43 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I don't agree with deliberately setting out to upset people: but I think a lot of what you seem to regard as ad hominem attacks are simply ways of testing how well prepared -- intellectually and emotionally -- someone is to defend the ideas they are putting forward. When someone like Peter Sellick, for instance, posts vacuous nonsense on OLO over and over again, it's surely reasonable to try and provoke him into giving his ideas some real thought and either making a genuine logical defence or -- better still -- abandoning them altogether.

This is the way the world makes progress: by abandoning ideas which have been shown to be stupid and embracing other, better ones. If we give up on that goal then any discussion -- including this one -- will become trivial and academic in the worst sense.

For the record, over the last few years I have seen major changes for the better in the content and style of articles put forward on religion and climate change -- the subjects I am most interested in -- and I attribute this at least in part to the readiness of dissenters to vigorously engage not only the arguments but the proponents' vested interests in putting them forward. If that means ad hominem attacks, then so be it.
Posted by Jon J, Tuesday, 1 February 2011 4:13:19 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
briar rose

'You won't find any ad hominem arguments I've made against MTR. You'll find plenty of spirited and robust disagreement with her position.'

Oh ... silly me. I didn't realise that you were just spiritedly and robustly disagreeing with MTR's Christianity, sexual and psychological health, professionalism, writing ability and personal honesty.

And you were just spiritedly and robustly reducing those who agreed with her position as having a 'megalomaniacal compulsion to foist their subjective judgements onto everyone else' and an 'uncontrolled hatred and denigration of men'.

Unfortunately, the most spirited and robust of ad hominems come from those who perceive an ad hominem attack in the arguments of those who disagree with them, but are unable to see it in themselves
Posted by Killarney, Tuesday, 1 February 2011 4:16:33 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Briar Rose,

Can you honestly say that you never employ ad hominems? Flipping through a few of your last posts I see a few personal attacks.

Also to quote "I have yet to meet an unscholarly person who wrote an internationally acclaimed doctoral thesis." You are setting yourself up and making yourself part of the argument.

There is an old adage, It takes two to Tango.
Posted by Democritus, Tuesday, 1 February 2011 4:21:10 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. ...
  8. 9
  9. 10
  10. 11
  11. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy