>be /pol/
>hate ad hominem attacks
>worship a candidate who won a campaign mocking people's heights/appearances/speech
>leaf
>>73509693
Insults are not ad homs.
>>73509693
Pretty sure he kicked their asses on policy too.
>>73509693
Who cares as long you win.
>>73509693
did you have some sort of point you were planning on making?
How is an insult ad hominem if there's no argument being presented to attack?
>>73509925
yes, yes they are are
they may or may not be FALLACIES, but they are ad hominem attacks
except when factual and relevant, then just correct arguments
>>73510030
only that I've just stumped /pol/ and their demagogue.
>Be Trump
>Be told you have no tangible ideas
>Mock opponents appearance
>>73509693
Trumpfags are the cancer of this board
Every single one is a reddit immigrant, mods need to go in trump general threads where they all gather and mass ban these autists
Initially I just thought it was funny to see the Liberals get a taste of their own bullshit. I was hoping he would tune it down after he won the nomination, unfortunately it doesn't look like he will. If he doesn't Clinton is going to win. We fucked up
>>73510227
you dont even know what stumped means
you just threw a nerf ball at a brick wall and declared that you cracked it
also learn to greentext
>>73510128
for example, here im going to stump you:
LOL YOURE SHIT HEAD!
NOW YOURE ON SUICIDE WATCH
yeah, see, youre entirely stumped
owned.
>>73510308
>make cruel comment about opponent
>opponent stutters in disbelief
>'STUMPED'
What ad hominem?
>>73510053
are you mentally retarded?
"ad hominem"
"to the man"
2 things:
ad hominem
AND
ad hominem FALLACY
i made this clear here:
>>73510128
>>73510470
retarded
a: ad hom fallacy
b: just ad hom
c: ad hom fallacy
d: just ad hom
>>73510470
1.
(of an argument or reaction)
Your little infographic is incorrect. Bringing someone's appearance into a debate is absolutely ad hominem. Trump has no real ideas. He literally smirks and says 'wow, more energy tonight, Jeb'.
That's ad hominem, retard
>>73510552
Ad hominem is the ad hominem fallacy. Ad hominem is attacking the argument by looking at the character presenting the argument (hence the name). An insult is just an insult.
>>73510128
Wrong. Ad homs are fallacies and insults are only fallacies if you in an argument and simultaneously fail to back up your claims.
>>73510470
he deflects questions with insults constantly. You all just give him a pass. SAD.
>>73510695
ad hominem fallacy is the ad hominem fallacy
ad hom alone is just ad hom, synon. w/ insult
2 different things, we've already been over this
inb4
>i didnt know this therefore not true
>>73510737
ad hom same as insult if NOT used to attack opponents argument, but just to ridicule
its a FALLACY if the attack of their character implies is affects their argument
>>73509693
Fuck off you shameless faggot! You're only making us all look bad!
>>73509693
>>73510656
>leaf
Dude weed l m a o
Maybe I should sell all my gold, so I can be on your good side.
^That's ad hom.
You're a dumbass, because you don't understand what ad hom is. Ad hom is devaluing the argument by using the character of the party presenting it as the reason for the argument being wrong. An insult, especially one derived by how you act, that is just tacked on, but not used as a reason for your argument being wrong is just an insult, dummy.
^That's an argument with insults, yet no ad hom.
>>73510737
>Ad homs are fallacies and insults are only fallacies if you in an argument and simultaneously fail to back up your claims.
shit i didnt even notice
you even got THAT meaning wrong
whether you back up your claims or not does not change anything youve said into a fallacy nor into a non-fallacy
>>73510128
Ad Hominem: This guy can't be president because look at the way he eats
Insult after Injury: Kasich shouldn't continue the race at this point, he's only doing it to try to steal votes.. and that's votes from me! He's trying to steal my votes when he stays in this race... and he doesn't even get them! He's useless at this point. I have never seen such a mess in my life, like look at the way he eats.. He just shoves it in, I have never seen something so disgusting in my life. EVERY INTERVIEW he's eating. Not even nicely. Little bites, Kasich, little bites.
>>73511028
>That's an argument with insults, yet no ad hom. FALLACY
ftfy
the second one has ad hom's (insults)
all ad hominem fallacies are insults, not all ad hominems\insults are fallacies
learn the difference
>>73510953
But you are dead wrong. Ad hom is always a type of fallacy. Dont argue semantics.
>>73511194
the insult after injury could correct (though oddly) also be phrased: "ad hom. after injury"
though not fallacious by personal attacks
ITT: people not knowing what an ad hominem is
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem
>>73510239
>butthurt randlet detected
>>73511194
>Trump deflects questions/arguments with insults in order to silence his opponents
pointless trying to get this across to them. They are willfully ignorant of Trump's fallacious campaign. Proof most people are okay with ad hominem when it benefits them
>>73511345
>Jeb asks question
>'more energy tonight Jeb, I like it'
>STUMPED
That is ad hominem. You are confused here. Cognitive dissonance.
>>73510239
>2016
>not being an autist
Shiggly diggly dangarino
example of ad hominem:
>you're poor, so how can you criticize rich people?
example of insult:
>lol what a poorfag
LEARN THE FUCKING DIFFERENCE
>>73511504
A compliment is ad hominem now?
You can't even stick to your own made up definition.
>>73511300
>Ad hom is always a type of fallacy.
not always, can be, can be just a personal jab
depends on this:
>>73510953
"ad hom" meaning fallacy just ambiguously omits "fallacy"
ad hom fallacy is a type of fallacy
ad hom without fallacy is just a personal attack, synon. with insult
ive made this crystal clear in several posts, making it as simple as possible
>semantics
>isnt everything
yes, lets play ad hoc definitions like "blacks cant be racist"
![1326815945935[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/CjYDuGi.jpg "1326815945935[1].jpg")
>>73509693
>>73509693
No one is being paid to shill for Hillary by the way. It's a Republican-funded lie and a pathetic attempt to smear her campaign.
>>73511483
>>73511345
thats ONLY the fallacy
yeah so you learned something today
shoot the messenger
>>73511548
read the thread.
>>73511573
>backhanded compliment
Jesus Christ. The mental gymnastics.
>2016
>a fucking leaf still shitposting poorly
>he might even really believe this
Calling Mitt a loser choke artist is facts not ad homs.
>>73509693
Politics is about winning, dumbfuck.
>>73511573
>backhanded compliment
Mental gymnastics... Changing the argument... So much fallacy...
>>73511483
are you a native England-speak speaker?
Cause surprise surprise, words and phrases can have multiple meanings! change spelling and ad or take away words and meaning changes!
magic!
"ad hom cannot mean anything but ad hom fallacy"
ad hom means personal attack, fallacy means fallacious
separate they have separate meanings, together they have a combined meaning
i hope youre not just shitbaiting
>>73511504
I am now a #JebHead
>>73509693
when did you get the impression we hate ad hom you fucking nigger leaf faggot kike
>>73511667
>read the thread
You are the only retard here that is claiming that ad homs are just insults. Every fucking definition of the word starts out "...is a logical fallacy..." how can you argue otherwise?
>>73509693
tru now i'm a #Berniegurney
>>73511573
heh
3/10
pat yourself on your back
>>73511880
it doesn't matter, because Trump has used both, anyway.
>Go back to Univision
>More energy tonight, Jeb
Two examples of him attack peoples personas to end arguments.
/pol/ will support Trump no matter what because he's the edgy candidate.
>>73511667
>>73511880
Also, samefagging this hard. Best way to troll is to argue semantics, eh?
>>73510128
Allow me to correct you
>"Your argument is invalid BECAUSE you are an asshole"
^ This is ad hom
>"Your argument is invalid, AND you are an asshole"
^ This is not ad hom
Please learn the difference
>>73511990
>no awoo
out out out
>>73511667
Yet, the source clearly says that ad hominem is short for argumentum ad hominem, which is the fallacy.
You are a dumbass, if you can't read a simple source.
>>73509693
Ad hominem is an attack in lieu of an argument. An insult is not by default ad hominem. You can be both wrong AND an asshole, which is frequently the case with his opposition.
>>73511938
>You are the only retard here that is claiming that ad homs are just insults.
never said that
they can be, or they can be fallacious
depends on if they are... fallacious
this is not quantum physics
>..is a logical fallacy..."
not arguing otherwise
the fallacy is the fallacy
when it is not, it is "to the man", without the fallacy
this is so mundane i cant believe you still feign ignorance:
when you subtract the FALLACY part, then its not a fallacy!
>but original coiners of the term probably/didnt intend or think of that
or
>most people books dont include that
"to the man" is the personal attack part of it
by its meaning alone without the "fallacy" part this makes it congruent with "insult"/"personal attack"
>>73512058
He doesn't know what he's talking about, but Trump has done both regardless -as I've given examples of earlier in the thread.
/thread
>>73511672
So, you agree that it's a compliment? Or are you gonna say a mole cricket is a mole too?
>>73512213
>backhanded compliments are compliments
g8 b8 m8
>>73511880
Good thing "ad hominem" is Latin and not English.
>>73512006
i never same fagged
samefagging is replying to yourself to make yourself look good assuming/hoping no one notices
>>73512058
>^ This is not ad hom FALLACY
there, now youve got it
>>73512112
yes, when it is fallacious, it is fallacious, when not, it is not
try this: x =2 when x=2, when x=1 then x!=2
>>73512179
typo
*they can be, or they can be fallacious
=
*they may or may not be
>>73512290
So I guess mole crickets aren't moles, and spider monkeys aren't monkeys.
>>73512457
>A backhanded compliment, also known as a left-handed compliment or asteism, is an insult that is disguised as a compliment.
GR8B8M8 allow me to indulge you, fagget, for the sake of the many retards who might actually think you're anything more than a troll.
>>73512184
its quite clear if have a modicum of reading comprehension
"fallacy" is usually implied, but left out it is ambiguous
try it in english "to the man" i.e. "personal attack"/"insult" FALLACY
take off the fallacy and what do you have?
just whats left, an insult
you are shooting the messenger for pointing out a meaning of a sub phrase
>>73512213
fallacy of many questions
>>73512293
english has many latin/germanic\greek etc terms
ad hominem is a loan phrase
>>73512357
Where in the hell are you getting your definition from? Because everyone from my published AP English teacher in highschool to wikipedia to every other definition and source I find says ad hominem is the fallacy and that an insult is an insult.
>>73512589
Can we stop arguing about the definition? He's met the criteria for both.
/pol/ stumped
/thread
>>73512142
>An insult is not by default ad hominem. FALLACY
ftfy
>>73512112
insult or personal attack is just "ad hominem" without "argumentum", tho not perfect, suffices
>>73509693
I find that logical fallacies sticky on this board very ironic.
>>73512689
Except he hasn't. Your example of an ad hom was him complimenting the guac man.
>>73512653
You're right about the definition, but you're wrong if you still think Trump hasn't used the fallacy.
>>73512741
Except ad hominem is short for argumentum ad hominem by definition. Lern 2 reed buddy.
>>73512779
tryhardfagget has no more arguments. Still has the best b8 tho. Gotta give you that
>>73510239
Jokes on you faggot, I've never even been to reddit.
>>73512871
You say I'm wrong, yet don't source your argument on how you're right. The burden of proof is on you since you're the one making the claim.
This is politics, not philosophy you dirty fucking chink. Its a shitfest where people aim to be elected by popular vote.
>>73513044
>>A backhanded compliment, also known as a left-handed compliment or asteism, is an insult that is disguised as a compliment.
I already gave you this definition, you dumb ass faggot
>>73512653
yes true, ad hominem fallacy is the fallacy, its often ambiguously left out (the word fallacy, left out, just implied), as ive stated
but when purposely and explicitly stated without "fallacy" is necessarily no more or less than synonymous with insult/personal attack by virtue of the simple meaning of the original latin
argumentum ad hominem
ad hominem
each word and possible phrase has its own meaning
im not disputing what the 1st, as we call "ad hom fallacy" that is incontrovertible
just that ad hom (alone, nothing more implied or meant) "to the man" == insult/personal attack
depending on its usage as described here:
>>73510953
>>73513044
and a source for your faggety ass https://www.google.ca/search?q=backhanded+compliment&oq=backhanded+compliment&aqs=chrome..69i57.2943j0j1&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
More of Hilla the Cunt troll army, here in an attempt to destabilize /pol
Won't work faggots
Huma Abiden is top nigger , Donald is going to hang her and the rest of the Shillary crew
Trains coming niggers
>>73513104
This is the first time I'm seeing you give any definitions in this whole thread. And how do you knownit was a back-handed compliment and not a real compliment? Trump is an abrasive guy, because he's a shark. Just because you FEEL something is one way doesn't mean it is.
>>73513246
I gave the same definition to you here. You fucking dumb ass. Literally a carbon copy
>>73512544
>>73509693
It doesn't take an argument to insult someone you stupid syrup suckling asian fuckface
>>73511667
Ad hominem (Latin for "to the man" or "to the person"[1]), short for argumentum ad hominem, is a logical fallacy in which an argument is rebutted by attacking the character, motive, or other attribute of the person making the argument, or persons associated with the argument, rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself.[2]
Ad hominem reasoning is not always fallacious, for example, when it relates to the credibility of statements of fact or when used in certain kinds of moral and practical reasoning.[3]
Fallacious ad hominem reasoning is normally categorized as an informal fallacy,[4][5][6] more precisely as a genetic fallacy, a subcategory of fallacies of irrelevance.
Literally the first three paragraphs.
>>73513135
>sourcing yourself
I'm just gonna stop responding to you, because there is no way you're not just some edgy kid on here baiting people because school's out for the summer.
>>73513246
>accuses me of fee fees
Give me a break you autist
>>73512853
"short for"
yes, often but not necessarily
thats all
we've been over this several times
just because that is the phrase you know in a language foreign to you, like a foreigner knowing "fuck you" or "where is airport" does not mean the words cannot be used alone, does not ironclad the phrase as being immutable (unchangeable)
"argumentum ad hom"
is unambiguous
"ad hom"
alone CAN be, but not always, when simply referring to the former
as it is in latin, and not just as a loan phrase
All this anti trump support comes from out of country
Here's my thoughts
- foreigners genuinely afraid of emperor trump (good, you should be and fuck you he's out guy not yours)
- OR...Shillary troll army using TOR or whatever, exit nodes are in these shitty foreign lands
Which tells me people are willing to do whatever for her (the cunt) but are afraid they'll be found out
Rightfully so, I hope someone takes up the effort to track these paid trolls down
>>73513184
>source for definition of back-handed compliment instead of source for Trump using ad hom (the source I asked you for)
Is Trudeau not funding the schools?
>>73511412
Funny how a conservative can do that and be winning now, yet the dems keep doing it and lose support.
>>73513441
I don't even hate Trump. I think he's hilarious. I'm pointing out that /pol/ pretends he doesn't constantly use ad hominem fallacy
>>73513351
ive covered all that
especially see latest:
>>73513422
>>sourcing yourself
no im going to just copy and paste the whole thing
>edgy
not what that means
damn so angry at the messenger
all you have is "books" with one established meaning for one phrase i havent touched
all we are talking about here is
"ad hom" without argumentum/fallacy
the whole issue you cant grasp is this:
it is most often implied with, but need not be
>>73513416
>feels a compliment from the Don is backhanded
>says they're not using feelings and then uses an isult (ad hom by your definition) in thread you started over ad hom use being bad
These mental gymnastics here.
W E W L A D
E
W
L
A
D
>>73512290
Well, only pussies would think a compliment was an insult.
>>73513374
lines 6 onward here >>73513596
respond to your post:
>>73513478
FUCKING GR8B8M8
'More energy tonight, Jeb' is a backhanded compliment in the eyes of anyone who isn't a fucking autist. That's why the crowd and America laughed. It was funny, but it was an insult, and it deflected Jeb's point. FUCKING AD HOMINEM. Trump is awesome, I'll give you that, but he uses fallacies. /thread
>>73513619
again, fallacy of many questions
im sure you would grin and thank if some said something like this to your kids/GF/wife/mom:
"you look pretty good for white trash"
its just a compliment right?
>>73513680
>all you have is "books"
Thank you for confirming my suspicions about you.
>>73513775
it's just b8
>>73513804
>it are true i know because of my learnings
when i disputed nothing quoted or referenced
HUGE imbecile.
>>73513775
>asked no questions
>le fallacy of many questions
>le ad hom isn't by definition a fallacy
>le you don't need to ask a single question to be asking too many questions
>>73513775
I wouldn't care.
And actually I would grin and thank them. They obviously said that in an attempt to hurt me, why give them the gratification of knowing they had succeeded?
>>73513977
Winning the argument over the definition doesn't make you any less stupid for being stumped by this:>>73513705
>>73513804
also:
>books think for me, these words dont have any meaning alone, especially foreign languages i dont know because these loan definitions are all all there is
>what do you mean "latin"
you do know those loan words/phrases have entire languages behind them?
by the way this:
>>73513804
is entirely an ad hom FALLACY
:)
>>73509693
The weak should fear the strong.
>>73513977
> i have no idea what that fallacy means
clearly.
did you stop beating your wife?
you can answer without yes or no
>>73514039
thats nice
but no you cannot feign ignorance of what a backhanded compliment is
kthxbai
>>73509693
We don't like ad hom when were having super serious discussions about politics. When debating estsblishment government puppets there's no point in intellectual debate as they are all corrupt liars, so as hom is much more effective, not to mention hilarious. Please think before you post next time. Sage
>>73509693
A fucking leaf.
>>73513804
wait....
are you some simpleton sheep who can not cognate anything not directed to from books?
also:
>>73513977
>le ad hom isn't by definition a fallacy
never said that
>>73514381
I'm not feigning ignorance. I know what you faggots think they are. I am saying they are non existent. Like moderate muslims, they are a figment of your imagination.
>>73514381
>being new enough to not know post ids
School gets out earlier and earlier every year.
>>73514505
Judging by this thread, you're in the minority who actually realizes Trump even uses fallacies. I actually think it's funny, too. I could give a fuck about these cronies he's 'stumping'.
Im just glad i could educated some that latin exists outside of their native loan words and merely "cause" others to take aim at the messenger
>>73509693
Fuck your feelings Trudeau your head would come soon after Hilldog and Berncommie
>>73514570
>equating rejecting the existances of moderate Islam with rejecting an oxford definition
G8B8M8
>>73514570
>not feigning ignorance
no, not any more, because your ignorance is now just necessarily a ruse thanks to you confirming you read this:
>>73513775
and:
>>73514573
wrong post or something
it happens
>>73509693
OP is a nigger faggot retard.
>>73514921
THAT AD HOM WITH TEACH HIM!
>>73509693
Making fun of the crippled guy is probably the worst thing he's done/said. I'm almost glad people mostly stick to the "racist" talking point when I'm discussing politics with people I know, because I can debunk that pretty easily.
>>73514838
You've done it a lot in this thread.
1 time is an accident
2 times is a coincidence
3< times is a pattern
>>73513804
i thought of one more fun notion:
>nothing exists that aint in books
they must be in short supply where you got your school LARNIN
>>73514957
You haven't proven me wrong.
Faggot.
>>73514992
you uh..... wrong thread?
oh wait you think same fagging means posting more than once in the same thread
>>73514992
Give him a break. It's not often two people in a thread deny the existence of an oxford definition
>>73515064
i was agreeing with you and sort of mocking the rest of these clowns
>>73515010
I really ruffled your feathers, didn't I?
Just give me a single source that isn't you that says you're right. Just one, guy.
>>73509693
>Doesn't realize they're competing to be President of the US, thus selecting a hominem
>By default politicians don't do what they promise
>Thus hominem is the only valid attack on politicians
>>73515136
Lots of energy tonight, anon?
He just keeps replying...
>>73515110
>getting this butthurt because people don't agree with you
A. FUCKING. LEAF.
>>73515251
>fucking understand it
>made a point of it in the thread
>arguing with people who genuinely don't believe he's used it
>>73515090
No, but you've adressed other people in this thread with quoting me.
>>73515110
never did that
nice reading comprehension
>>73515298
LoL more like getting infuriated by autists who don't believe a dictionary definition of 'backhanded' exists.
>>73515396
I was defending you, tard. I was mocking him for rejecting the definition. I was defending your inability to distinguish him and the other guy in your replies.
>>73515110
So you agree that since he, like you, deny the established definition of ad hom. that he's in fact stupid enough to ignore post ids and think I'm the person he keeps responding to and quoting me at?
>>73509693
This post was low energy. Second rate. Sad.
>>73514972
How do you debunk the not renting to blacks thing in the 80s? Or the saying he only wants Jews counting his money?
I mean obviously here we know niggers are awful tenants, but it's a little harder to get that point across without being racist. The Jews thing I usually dismiss as an off-handed joke based in truth.
Everything else though is easy to debunk because most people come with the Mexican and Islam thing.
>>73515505
He's stupid for rejecting the definition of 'ad hominem'. You're stupid for rejecting the definition of 'backhanded'. You're both stupid for not being able to comprehend the conversations in this thread.
>>73515416
>>73515136
just give me a single source that says your right that was written by god
oh right, at some point HUMANS figured that stuff out and wrote it down!
this is the post you need to grasp in order to move forward:
>>73513422
3 letter phrase
argumentum ad hominem
or ad hom fallacy
both are synonymous
remove argumentum/fallacy and you have new phrase that is
INCIDENTALLY ALSO THE ABBREVIATION, but separate meaning if used stand alone (i.e. NOT an abbreviation)
your position is: these words cannot mean something alone because they cannot be used outside of that phrase\abbreviation
>>73515372
and?
>>73509693
>>73515607
Do you get paid per post? Or are you paid based on how many replies you get, or how long your thread stays active?
>>73515670
finally i figured out the crux of your bewilderment, last line of that post brings it to PERFECT clarity
and i mean PERFECT
>>73515670
>>73515761
I only get paid to lick her vag. I only do this shit because I'm a cuck.
>>73515820
yes i linked my post and im doing it again, because its useful
no wait, it MUST because of my vanity
simply has to be
>>73515835
do you ever use maple syrup?
>>73515607
I didn't deny the definition, I just don't recognize the Don's comlpliment on Guac Man dinally having more energy as backhanded, especially since he was the one to give Guac Man pointers in the first place.
>>73509693
>standing on principle
>implying any stops should remain in place to prevent a Trump white house
>candidates who get brushed aside by mean words does not a president make
The man could go on record saying he could be videotaped shooting someone in the street and have it not effect his favorability.
>>73515869
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/ad-hominem
Dude, I can't believe you have me agreeing with this retard >>73515912
but he's right, and you're wrong. We're speaking English, not latin, you dumb ass fagget
>>73515601
>How do you debunk the not renting to blacks thing in the 80s?
They tried to get him on discrimination charges but couldn't. Then he settled (which was not an admission of guilt) to get the whole thing behind him. Besides, there is no direct tie of Trump discriminating against blacks, even if a company he owned did have some responsibility, which they never found them guilty of.
>>73516452
Regressive left logic dictates that settling = guilty
>>73516040
no one ever said we are speaking exclusively one or the other
ad hominem/argumentum happens to be latin
see:
>>73515670
and
>>73513422
im not disputing what is in the oxford dictionary
if you arent getting this, then your intelligence and reading comprehension sucks
>>73515923
>gold and black
yes please
>>73516832
Except you are. Ad hom is the fallacy. Ad hom is short for ad hominem which is sgort for argumentum ad hominem.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem
>>73515923
also i was thinking: what would the settings be:
normal:
safety
semi
full auto
trump
????
????
????
He's the king of manipulating public opinion and the media
And since that's what the Dems have been doing for years unopposed, I welcome it. It's clearly the only way to win an election in a democracy with universal suffrage. So bless him. At least there's finally someone on our side who isn't too retarded to exploit the media.
>>73516452
I guess that works, but as
>>73516600
said, settling still looks bad.
>>73516926
ive covered that many times
read the posts linked
>>73516832
the latin definition of the word literally means 'to another person', so you're latin argument falls flat regardless.
I am getting what you're saying, but like he tried to point out, all of your arguments are based on personal assumptions.
>>73517039
your*
>>73517039
covered it, tired of linking
read the thread
>all of your arguments are based on personal assumptions.
no, i read what the phases, AND the words mean
thanks
>>73517039
just read the last fucking line here:
>>73515670
>>73517030
>i debunked your source without any sources to back up my claims
That's what you're saying.
flags allow the users to use more ad homs on posters
>>73517133
Idioms must be a tough thing for you to grasp too.
>>73517182
retard. ad hominem, on its own, with our without 'fallacy' or 'argumentative', still maintains its definition. If you're speaking latin, it literally translate to 'to another person'. You are talking out of your ass. We ALL understand what you're trying to say, it's just that it's retarded.
>>73517039
yeah nevermind i just learned that every single word and phrase today, the world over, has never been new, has never changed, and all language is exactly as it was since the big bang
no dynamicism whatsoever, absolutely stagnate and immutable
>>73517536
Definitions don't change because of how ONE person (i.e: you) uses it.
>>73517449
yeah its ok read:
>>73517536
>>73517521
covered, see:
thread
or dont
>>73517506
red herring
>>73517536
except that you're making up its origin definition. It never meant what you're claiming. Please source.
>>73517634
>>73517632
i never tried to change any definition
rather necessarily factual meaning of sub phrase
>IT CAN ONLY BE AN ABBREVIATION
see last line here:
>>73515670
>>73517701
(you)
>>73517639
never made up any origin definition
subtracted "argument" or "fallacy" from the phrase
sub meaning of sub phrase
>>73517701
fuckin genji
>>73517639
itt:
we love circles!
>>73517746
Dude, you are literally fucking retarded. I give you sources, you pull nonsense from your asshole, sourcing your own misguided logic. Please don't shoot up a school. You are psychotic. /thread
>>73509693
They first insulted:
His hair
His hand size
His family name
Etc..
You're hitting the crack pipe pretty hard today there Ahmed
>>73517889
the post is still there:
>>73515670
you are supposing those words only exist in latin for that one loan phrase and cannot mean anything apart or with other words
brilliant
>>73517824
subtracting those words doesn't equal 'simple insult'. YOU ARE FUCKING RETARDED.
>3-2=1 DURR LOGIC
Nuance in life, faggot, please
>>73517889
p.s. never disputed any of your source, in fact they are my sources too
but you stick to:
>IT CAN ONLY BE AN ABBREVIATION
yeah ok
>>73509693
>be canadian
>post on /pol/
>expects to be taken seriously
>>73517994
no it doesnt
because you must maintain your chosen narrative for this thread
that it is synonymous with insult or personal attack is incidental
you can believe what you want, but words of a phrase can be used otherwise, and when you rearrange or add/subtract words, and arent creating an abbreviation, the phrase does not remain congruent
>>73518055
ITS NOT AN ABBREVIATION. IT JUST DOESNT MEAN WHAT YOU THINK IT MEANS.
>it doesn't mean 'insult', even on its own in latin
YOU ARE A DUMB FAGGOT
>>73517994
>argumentum ad hominem
>minus argument
>ad hominem
>IT CANT MEAN ANYTHING ELSE BECAUSE ITS ALSO AN ABBREVIATION
>no abbreviation can mean anything else
ah,
themoreyouknow.vbs
>>73510030
>>73510128
>>73510308
>>73510426
>>73510501
>>73510552
>>73510811
>>73510953
>>73511131
>>73511238
>>73511335
>>73511592
>>73511667
>>73511880
>>73511957
>>73512179
>>73512357
>>73512589
>>73512741
>>73513135
>>73513422
>>73513596
>>73513680
>>73513775
>>73513868
>>73514288
>>73514381
>>73514551
>>73514646
>>73514838
>>73514957
>>73515010
>>73515090
>>73515129
>>73515396
>>73515670
>>73515725
>>73515820
>>73515869
>>73515898
>>73516832
>>73516890
>>73516969
>>73517030
>>73517969
>can't handle the bantz
This is how I know you're a jew.
>>73518180
>be you
>think argumentative ad hominem - argumentative = insult
>be you
>think the 'ad hominem' in 'ad hominem fallacy' = insult
It IS NOT AN 'INSULT FALLACY' YOU FUCKING TARD
>>73518246
ad hom (always necessarily meaning "ad hominem)
CAN BE an abbreviation for
*argumentum ad hominem
*ad hominem fallacy
which are both congruent
by virtue of being incidentally also an abbreviation does not nullify these words or this phrase in any way
you maintain it does not, because that is your chosen position, not because that is where logic leads you, but because its coincidentally not included in texts.
Protip:
these words have standing and mean far far outside of this phrase and even each alone.
that the words lose no meaning from constituting this abb. you seem to think is a matter of petty pride for me in this argument, when it is just where logic leads.
again:
sub phrase, sub meaning
ad hom CAN BE an abb., or not
>NO ITS ONLY THE ABB.
no
>op spent 43 posts to prove his shitty argument
>but is still losing
top kek
>>73518694
"but because its coincidentally not included in texts"
Fucking die. Thanks for the gr8b8. You really went to town on me.
>>73518353
(you)
>>73518353
ad hominem FALLACY
>>73518429
>know argumentative ad hominem - argumentative CAN = insult
ftfy
>demonstrates that 'ad hominem' in 'ad hominem fallacy' = insult
ftfy
>INSULT FALLACY'
>denigrating character of opponent in argument as necessarily a factor in "wrongness" of their argument is not an insult
amazing!
if you substitute correctly, you can accurately phrase it that way, though oddly
yes, words have multiple, and overlapping meanings, and can be substituted!
see:
the whole thread
>>73518766
I love b8, m8.
LoL
", not because that is where logic leads you, but because its coincidentally not included in texts."
Jesus. I am an idiot.
>>73518909
What is up with your grammar? You are such a fucking troll this is unbelievable.
Bye. Killing myself for falling for this high quality b8
>>73518833
ah yes:
>he cant be serious and must be trolling because i give up
the most graceful of all cop-outs
i graciously accept your forfeit
>>73518833
did you know that when oxford release 3rd ed of the eng dictionary that it will not be identical to the 2nd?
i just cant imagine how that is possible
there will even be things INCLUDED that werent in the last one!
bizarro world!
>>73519018
>grammar
red herring
and there are typographical, though no grammatical, errors in that post
>>73519049
>be me
>guy tells me I'm being illogical for asking for sourced info, and not just following his personal logic
>take him seriously
>for over an hour
>>73519165
It's absolutely a red herring. You are a total cunt and your grammar sucks dick.
>be /pol/
>democracy is just a popularity contest! wake up sheeple!
>worship a populist candidate because he is le funny wall millionaire man who le trolls people on twitter xD
>>73511880
Go to bed, Ludwig.
I see nothing wrong with ad hominem. No reason to go into great detail when you just want to talk some shit.
The problem with trump is he is just a plant to piss off Americans once he loses to Hilary. Nothing better than waiving hope in front of pissed off people before replacing it with their worst fears.
>>73510128
>>73510426
>>73510552
>>73510501
>>73510811
>59 posts of trying to do damage control about being wrong
Is this funny or sad?
>>73519165
>though no grammatical, errors in that post
Topkek sentence. I almost thought you were serious again.
>>73519214
>guy tells me I'm being illogical for asking for sourced info, and not just following his personal logic
>personal logic
yes, this is my flavor
i call it "actual"(logic) instead of
"i didnt read it anywhere, so it cant be" flavor
tantamount to:
it wasnt on the news, therefore it didnt happen
again, for fucks sake:
"ad hominem are two words that exist, and have meaning only in, the loan phrase referring to the logical fallacy"
but by no means "get" that
>>73519369
Just sad.
>>73519281
yes it, which is vanity and empty
good luck though
>>73519369
>being wrong
argument by repitition/ad nauseam
>>73519411
ESL?
you probably wouldnt encounter such wording in high school or less in canada
>>73517746
You're the only person the world over that believes ad hominem is different from argumentum ad hominem.
>>73509693
Changing tactics huh?
>>73519469
see you really are sticking to this:
"ad hominem are two words that exist, and have meaning only in, the loan phrase referring to the logical fallacy"
amazing.
>>73510128
Ad hominem is a fallacy you fucking retard
>>73519562
>defends his grammar using a grammatically flawed sentence
>doesn't see the irony
>>73519571
not is, CAN be
if you arent using the abbreviation
and not the only one, ive had this discussion
with other sycophants who think all non religious text by man is basically from on-high
(oh the ironing)
I am now a #HillBilly
>>73519586
I wish this were just an elaborate troll, a bored guy with tons of time on his hands. I want the old times back ;_;
>>73519641
see almost any:
>>73518353
it CAN BE (gee never get tired of cluing you folks in)
>>73519660
no grammatical flaws, just a higher "grade" level than you seem to know
>>73519717
I get it. You're God.
Do you own any firearms?
>>73519779
so substantiate that:
>>73519612
>>73519829
>god dictates human language
no you dont get it because your reading comprehension is poor
>>73519806
>"grade"
>quotations
>this guy is retarded
>I should probably abandon thread
>>73519965
there are not grades per se in university/etc
themoreyouknow-partdeux.vbs
>>73519965
yeah i youre probably done
none ever managed this, which is the crux of your argument:
>>73519856
>>73520064
>Consistently misuses commas and quotations.
>Even when defending his grammar
>topkek
>>73520176
as stated
typographical errors yes
grammatical, no
>Even when defending his grammar
it actually does go beyond high school
grammar attack is an ad hom FALLACY btw
stay classy sir
>>73520342
this is now a diaper thread
>>73520657
source?
>>73519717
>can be
Oh dear God. This is some major backpedaling.
>>73509693
Oh christ its Canacuck again.
Is this the same guy who posts every single day?
>>73522298
Do you really have to ask?
>>73509693
>>be /pol/
>>hate ad hominem attacks
you must be new here
>racism which is entirely based on how someone looks doesn't breed superficial people who thrive on being fake
welcome to reality, /pol/ is a pageant tier board
>>73522298
