Sally Strange on Nostr: npub1ccn4e…6czwu npub1lvu7t…63ua2 That's not what "ad hominem" means, for fuck's ...
npub1ccn4ec2s2dmhzu4cthwhy56hcsswk4z3j3kvhlhuvp96phm9zjrqj6czwu (npub1ccn…czwu) npub1lvu7tg5s64xvxnlvh5mjh5w6kjltcr0e6g2snu53a65tze8mf7ws463ua2 (npub1lvu…3ua2) That's not what "ad hominem" means, for fuck's sake.
"Ad hominem" means "to the man", and it's shorthand for the logical fallacy of insulting an arguer on grounds unrelated to his argument so as to discredit both the man and the argument. If I were doing ad hominem, I'd be saying "You're a lazy asshole and that's why you're wrong about capitalism."
My attacks on capitalism itself are not an ad hominem! Nor are they any kind of logical fallacy. You just disagree, and you have bad reasons for doing so. Possibly related to your intellectual laziness, but that's irrelevant speculation on my part.
I urged you once before to pay attention to what I'm saying rather than sparring with an imaginary interlocutor. I'm starting to wonder if that's possible for you. If you can't argue against a straw version of me, CAN you argue against capitalism? At all?
"Ad hominem" means "to the man", and it's shorthand for the logical fallacy of insulting an arguer on grounds unrelated to his argument so as to discredit both the man and the argument. If I were doing ad hominem, I'd be saying "You're a lazy asshole and that's why you're wrong about capitalism."
My attacks on capitalism itself are not an ad hominem! Nor are they any kind of logical fallacy. You just disagree, and you have bad reasons for doing so. Possibly related to your intellectual laziness, but that's irrelevant speculation on my part.
I urged you once before to pay attention to what I'm saying rather than sparring with an imaginary interlocutor. I'm starting to wonder if that's possible for you. If you can't argue against a straw version of me, CAN you argue against capitalism? At all?