Today's fallacy: ad hominem. Latin for "to the person." In plain English, it means "I can't argue with your point, so I'm going to insult you instead."
Rather than dealing with someone's actual argument, this fallacy goes straight for the person making it. Their looks, their job, their past, their voice, their background... anything that can be used to distract from the issue. It's the rhetorical equivalent of flipping the table when you're losing the chess game.
In everyday life, this fallacy shows up in arguments between friends or family. You make a valid point, like saying someone is late all the time, and they fire back with, "Oh please, like you're so perfect." That doesn't address the issue. It's just turning the conversation into a character attack. Instead of dealing with the point, they shift the spotlight to you, hoping to deflect the criticism. It's not resolution. It's deflection dressed up as defense.
In politics, ad hominem is practically a campaign strategy. Instead of addressing the other person's policies or voting record, you get personal. "You can't trust her tax plan, she lied about her college transcript." Or "Don't listen to his healthcare proposal, he's a millionaire who flies private." Whether or not those things are true, they have nothing to do with the actual argument. It's not about the merits of the idea. It's about taking a shortcut to discredit the person offering it. And unfortunately, it works far too often.
In business, this happens all the time. You bring up a legitimate concern in a meeting, and someone waves it off with, "Well, you've only been here six months." Translation: your point might be valid, but I don't want to deal with it, so I'm going to question your status instead. Classic deflection.
Back when I started in the computer business in 1994, I was 21 years old. I had been working with computers since I was 8, and by that point I had over a decade of hands-on experience setting up systems, installing software, wiring networks, and writing code. I knew personal computers inside and out. But that didn't matter to a lot of the clients I met with. Especially the older folks who took one look at me and decided I was just some kid who probably fixed printers at the mall*.
I remember one vice president in particular. After reviewing my recommendations, he told me, flat out, "We just can't go with someone so inexperienced." Inexperienced? I was building my own computers since before most of his staff even knew what a mouse was. But none of that mattered. My logic wasn't wrong. My age just didn't match his idea of what an expert looked like**.
I ran into this same thing when I started teaching in the classroom. I was a little older by then. I opened my first actual training center in 1999, not counting the one in the dining room of my house, so I was about 27. I'd be up there teaching Access to people twice my age, and I could tell some of them were thinking, "Does this guy really know what he's talking about?" To be fair, a lot of them were accountants or financial planners. They already understood the business side of things. They just wanted to learn how to build a database to do what they'd been doing in Excel. I knew the computer side, but I didn't have their real-world financial background***.
Star Trek has one of the best examples of an ad hominem attack in the very first episode of Deep Space Nine. When Captain Sisko meets Picard for the first time, he can barely look him in the eye. It doesn't matter what Picard has done to save the Federation or that he was assimilated against his will. All Sisko sees is Locutus of Borg, the face of the enemy at Wolf 359, and the one he holds responsible for his wife's death. He doesn't attack Picard's logic. He never even engages with what Picard is saying. He just shuts down, because in his mind, Picard isn't a captain. He's the reason his life fell apart. It's personal, not rational. And Picard knows it. He doesn't argue. He just lets it hang there. That's ad hominem in its rawest form. Ignore the argument. Target the man.
On a personal note, I've got a friend who I've known for years, who jumps on almost anything I post online if it touches on anything he disagrees with. I'm not going into specifics here, but the pattern is always the same. He doesn't come back with facts. He doesn't try to refute what I said. He just responds with, "you're an idiot," or something to that extent (usually with a lot of ALL CAPS SHOUTING at me). I'm like, no... If you want to have a debate, show me something. Bring facts. Link to articles written by actual journalists, not some anonymous blog buried three layers deep in conspiracy-world. Then we can talk. But if your entire argument is that I'm dumb for having a different view, you're not debating. You're just attacking the person. And that's the definition of an ad hominem.
Lesson: Attacking a person is not the same as refuting their argument. If someone tells you 2 + 2 = 4, and your response is "Well you're just a jerk," you're not winning the debate. You're just making noise.
LLAP RR
* In all fairness, my first "real" job was at Radio Shack, and I did fix more than a couple printers. Back then, dot matrix printers were actually fixable. You could replace the ribbon, swap out the print head, clean the rollers, and that was usually enough to keep them running. Paper jams weren't a crisis. You just cleared the path and moved on with your life. Compare that to today's inkjet printers. If the feed mechanism goes bad or the carriage starts sticking, you're basically done. It's often cheaper to replace the whole printer than to fix it, assuming you can even find the parts. And half the time it's not even a hardware issue. It's firmware refusing to recognize a non-OEM cartridge. They're disposable now. Back then, they were machines you could actually work on. Kind of like cars. But that's a whole nuther story...
** Now that I'm in my 50s myself, I get the instinct to be skeptical when someone young walks in with big ideas. But that doesn't make it any less of an ad hominem move. Ignore the argument, judge the person.
*** That's still true to some extent. I've learned a lot since then, but I know databases, not all these other business types. And if you're thinking about becoming a consultant, you're going to find out pretty quickly that this is where the real challenge is. You're going to get called by all kinds of businesses: manufacturing companies, service industries, doctors, lawyers, insurance agencies, you name it. You'll walk in knowing Access, but you're not going to know anything about their world. You'll be sitting across the table from someone who needs you to build something to solve a specific problem, and you'll have to start from scratch just to understand what that problem even is. I've had to learn how to track crash-test dummies, which meant figuring out how to read from accelerometers. I've built systems for mixing chemicals, for insurance form processing, for auction bidding, for tracking warranty claims, for rental equipment, and about a hundred things I never even knew were jobs before someone called me. None of that was in any Access manual. Nothing really prepares you for that moment when you walk into a new company and have to learn an entire industry on the fly. That's the hardest part. Building the database is the easy part. Understanding how it fits into their business is where the real work begins.
I have a similar "friend" who posts comments directed at me, many along the lines of "You're a right-wing MAGA idiot, so there's no point in trying to reason with you!" The funny part, I'm a very central centrist. I don't support President Trump other than recognizing he was elected by the people in a country where I am a citizen and pay taxes, but no longer reside. And the really funny part, all his points of discussion come from memes, which he comments upon as being "so true".
Lars Schindler
@Reply 11 days ago
Radio Shack...
In Germany, this company is probably only known because of Sheldon Cooper.
Quiz question:
If I now imagine that Richard Rost would have been just like Sheldon Cooper as a young man - what logical mistake would I have made? ;-)
Thomas yeah, I usually try not to get too deep into politics here on the website. I know it can be divisive, and that's not what this place is for. But I will say this: I believe in science and the scientific method. If a politician openly rejects the overwhelming consensus of the scientific community, they are not getting my vote. Simple as that.
This came up with a friend of mine who was strongly against vaccines and masks during the pandemic. I would post things like, "According to the current scientific consensus, the vaccine is safe and helps stop the spread of COVID." He did not want to hear it. That is his choice. But I am going to listen to the people who have dedicated their lives to studying this stuff.
I am not a doctor, but I trust the medical and scientific communities*. One thing I respect about science is that it is built on scrutiny. If someone is wrong, there is a long line of experts ready to challenge them with data and research. That is how progress happens. If you have real evidence that overturns the consensus, publish it, have it peer-reviewed, and win your Nobel Prize. Otherwise, I am sticking with the people who actually understand the subject. My friend does not see it that way. And that is fine. But unless he has real evidence to bring to the table, I am not going to argue with conspiracy theories.
* Now, just to be clear, this is not the appeal to authority fallacy, which I will be covering in my series. You should never blindly trust someone just because they hold a title or position. But in science, authority is earned through years of study, research, and peer review. The people we call experts have dedicated their lives to understanding a specific field. And the great thing about science is that anyone can become that kind of authority. It is not about being appointed or elected. It is about doing the work, learning the material, and contributing to the body of knowledge.
That is the beautiful thing about science. If you erased every book, wiped every memory, and destroyed all the research, given enough time, science would rediscover the same truths. The process leads to consistent, repeatable results because it is based on evidence and observation. You cannot say the same for some other ways people claim to gain "knowledge." Those often rely on tradition, authority, or belief, and without the original source, they vanish.
Lars I was definitely not a Sheldon Cooper type growing up. I was smart in certain areas - math, science, computers, obviously - but nowhere near his level when it came to things like physics. And I wasn't nearly as neurotic. I didn't have his quirks, like knocking three times on Penny's door every time.
I was more of a hybrid nerd-jock. I played baseball my whole life, was on the Junior Varsity team, and had plenty of friends in those circles. But I was also into the nerdy stuff - band, orchestra, computer club, all the AP classes. I had a lot of friends who were into that too, and we played Dungeons & Dragons on the weekends. So I moved comfortably between both groups.
I gave ChatGPT a picture of me and said, "Hey, make me an employee behind the counter at RadioShack." And it got most of it right. I don't think it looks like me, though.
I'm trying to remember if we had a Radio Shack in my smallish town. I do remember an electronics store that was pretty good sized. I was in 4-H and took an electronics class. The instructor saw us making a shock machine mildly based on the one that was at Disneyland. Ours was the generator attached to the elevated bicycle tire. With a few parts and guidance he gave us, we made a small box with two handles that would curl the arms of the toughest football player.
Sorry, only students may add comments.
Click here for more
information on how you can set up an account.
If you are a Visitor, go ahead and post your reply as a
new comment, and we'll move it here for you
once it's approved. Be sure to use the same name and email address.
The following is a paid advertisement
Computer Learning Zone is not responsible for any content shown or offers made by these ads.