FYI - If you're going to accuse me of something...

Make sure you get it right in the first place.

At times I've been accused of merely resorting to the argumentum ad hominem fallacy when I refer to the idiocy of certain fundie skeptics or use the terms twit, stupid etc. in reference to them or their "arguments".

However as I recently said to one nitwit, who, in this case, IIRC claimed to be a Christian:

Ad hominem:
Man 1: 1+1=3
Man 2: You're an idiot.

Not ad hominem
Man 1: 1+1=3
Man 2: 1 + 1 =2, you idiot

I'm quite capable of dealing with your arguments, should you actually offer any that haven't already been addressed and also insulting you, when you deserve it.

^{(Note: the ad hom not ad hom was originally from a theologyweb member here. )}

On a positive note, one recent whiner, who doesn't understand the concept and thinks respect is not something earned or diminished by idiocy, seems intent on giving me material for the 4GrinsNGiggles dept/category of my blog :)

---

Filed under: Apologetics -- Misc.

Blogs with open posts: Jo's Cafe -- Echo9er -- Pursuing Holiness -- The Right Nation -- The Random Yak -- Blue Star Chronicles -- third world county -- Adam's Blog -- Woman Honor Thyself -- The Florida Masochist -- The Bullwinkle Blog -- Stuck On Stupid -- The Crazy Rants of Samantha Burns

Technorati Tags: Debate -- Falllacy -- Misc

Trackback URI                                                 View blog reactions