• Buffalox@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    I understand you are hurt and angry.

    That’s ad hominem.

    But you have to understand there are people out there from all around the world

    That doesn’t change anything, whatever country you are from, using Xitter means you are using and thereby supporting a fascist platform.

    You are in your own bubble

    OK, and which bubble is that?
    Seems to me that the ones in a bubble are those that continue to use Xitter, oblivious to it supporting fascism, or accepting that it does. Now THAT’s being in a bubble.

    • TootGuitar@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      I don’t have any skin in this game but just want to point out that “I understand you are hurt and angry” is an attempt to empathize with you, and not an ad hominem fallacy.

      • Buffalox@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        20 hours ago

        He/She doesn’t understand anything, he/she doesn’t know me.

        If the comment was along the lines of: I understand IF you are hurt and angry, it would be different and not presumptuous. But that he continues with: “But you have to understand…” Like he is talking to a child, confirms the interpretation of an ad hominem IMO."

        But thanks for pointing out a possibly poorly worded good intention. But the way he wrote it, it looks like an ad hominem to me.

        • TootGuitar@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          19 hours ago

          You don’t just get to call any words that you don’t like, or even words directly attacking you, an ad hominem. A statement is only an ad hominem if 1) it’s attempting to refute an argument 2) by attacking the character/motive of the person making the argument INSTEAD OF the actual content of the argument. “Your argument is wrong because you’re an idiot” is an ad hominem. What the other commenter said to you is not. Note that people claiming “ad hominem” on statements that are not are sometimes said to be committing an “ad hominem fallacy fallacy.”

          https://laurencetennant.com/bonds/adhominem.html

          • Buffalox@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            9 hours ago

            A statement is only an ad hominem if 1) it’s attempting to refute an argument 2) by attacking the character/motive of the person

            Which is EXACTLY what he did. And I even explained that in my previous post.

            • TootGuitar@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              8 hours ago

              Ok buddy, you only quoted part of what I said. Did you even read the post I linked to? You’re wrong; it’s cool though, we all make mistakes. Accept it and move on.

              • Buffalox@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                6 hours ago

                Ok buddy, you only quoted part of what I said.

                I took the part that was essential. Your claim about the below is essentially the same argument.

                Your argument is wrong because you’re an idiot

                That’s the same as your argument is wrong, because you are angry and hurt, (and therefore not rational). Both are attacks on the person and not the argument. Although one is more polite than the other.

                And oh he also claimed i was living in a bubble, so he actually made 3 comments that were ill camouflaged personal attacks, first on my emotional state, 2nd on my rationality, and finally claiming I’m uninformed from living in a bubble.

                Yet I’m the one downvoted for calling his ad hominem out.
                The fact that X is used outside USA is obvious, thinking he needs to “explain” that is ridiculous, and I live in EU, so I think I’m aware of that. And Xitter definitely also has a fascist agenda outside USA, but maybe he isn’t aware of that?

                None of the 3 attacks (non arguments) were ever qualified any further, probably because he can’t.

                But I understand why you are hurt and angry, but you must understand you are wrong, because “obvious fact”, and you live in a Bubble.

                So do you think that’s an OK comment to our discussion? Because that’s EXACTLY what the comment by NoiseColor to me boils down to. It’s an even bigger ad hominem when put together.

    • NoiseColor @lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      3 days ago

      I see that the emotional level is too great for any discussion. Good luck to you, I hope you get a moment for yourself and have a nice rest of the day.

      Good bye.

      • Buffalox@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        3 days ago

        I see you are unable to actually argue your point, and instead choose to continue with the ad hominem.
        I’m still interested to hear what bubble it is you consider me to be in?