its a blog. It tracks Slime aswell, but that is at developement
stage at the moment.
Argumentum ad hominem or argument to the person is used when
person A states X, and B claims A is not credible so X is false.
Opposed to argumentum ad hominem is the appeal to authority, in
which any given X is always true - based on assumption that whoever
states X is credible.
The use of argumentum ad hominem is most common to political
argumentation, when questioning one`s credibility is a legitime
form of political argumentation. It can only be expressed freely
and plural when freedom of speech is in effect.
The abuse of argumenting to person is probably the most easily
used shortcut to gaining advantage in conflicts of any kind. Lets
have for example a man in his midlife, who has a wife and recently
they got a baby. Man and his child are involved in a conflict
regarding getting attention from her. Now the man could at any
time use argumentum ad hominem to discredit the baby only inasmuch
to get a little more attention from his woman. But the baby cant
actually make any arguments so it would feel normal that you dont
go telling your spouse how noisy, ugly and smelly babies are,
just to gain some more attention. So in such a case use of argumentum
ad hominem is clearly abuse towards a person (a new born child)
who actually cant argue back at all.
We can in fact find abuse of argumentum ad hominem in our daily
lives and probably use it routinely. It is the most commonly accepted
form of cannibalism amongst all societies. Mostly such abuse is
newer penalised - it is commonly rewarded. A person who persistanly
indulges in abusing argumentation to person often gains reputation
to be the authoroty by tradition and as such they can then start
using appeal to authority to object anything. So there is an interesting
corellation between ad hominem and appealing to authority and
can be wieved as both being each others oposite but on the other
hand we can find relations from ad hominem to authority ar vice
The conclusion is that all authority is based on ad hominem argumentation
and to discredit people randomly is the only way to gain as mch
authority as possible in any given situation. We can deduce even
that al true argumentation (which ad hominem is not always) is
in long run supressed by arguments of authority, so all other
argumentation is futile and can not prevail. It is often said
arguments failed and violence has broken and in fact
it always is this way.
the.Post on teh slime.bot|