Feedback/Notes

 

Latest Activity

Stephen Brodie commented on Julien's group The Music Box
"The great Peggy Lee. Peggy Lee -- Is That All There Is? 1969"
6 minutes ago
Randall Smith commented on Julien's group The Music Box
"Loren, VOCES8 rendition was nice. I couldn't find the King Singers."
4 hours ago
Loren Miller commented on Loren Miller's group Quote Of The Day
"Atheism is a religion like abstinence is a sex position. -- Bill Maher And like bald is a hair…"
5 hours ago
Mrs.B commented on Julien's group The Music Box
"This is music from the north-eastern part of India and not Bollywood. The language is Assamese :…"
9 hours ago
Mrs.B commented on Adriana's group Science!
"Yes, interesting topic."
17 hours ago
Idaho Spud commented on Adriana's group Science!
"The Human journey was interesting.  Thanks Stephen."
18 hours ago
Mrs.B commented on Loren Miller's group Quote Of The Day
"Yes!"
22 hours ago
Stephen Brodie commented on Adriana's group Science!
"Human journey, with Alice Roberts and Jim Al-Khalili | Humanists UK Convention 2021"
yesterday
Stephen Brodie commented on Julien's group The Music Box
" Loren very beautiful A Capella "
yesterday
Loren Miller commented on Julien's group The Music Box
"Some time back, Billy Joel wrote a beautiful lullaby for his daughter, which he then released on…"
yesterday
Loren Miller commented on Loren Miller's group Quote Of The Day
"I have my beliefs, you have your beliefs, but don't use the machinery of government to impose…"
yesterday
Richard Levison left a comment for TheBurningMonk
""Happy Birthday!""
yesterday
Mrs.B commented on Loren Miller's group Quote Of The Day
"No-brainer there. Pun intended."
yesterday
Loren Miller commented on Loren Miller's group Quote Of The Day
"Which is it, is man one of God’s blunders or is God one of man’s? -- Friedrich Wilhelm…"
Wednesday
Richard Levison left a comment for pansy
""Happy Birthday!""
Wednesday
Chris B commented on Adriana's group Freethought and Funny Bones
"A great one, Patricia!"
Wednesday
Ian Mason commented on Sydni Moser's group Coffee Break
"Boghossian has been very provocative with the goal of creating debate over several years, including…"
Wednesday
Mrs.B commented on Sydni Moser's group Coffee Break
"It is disgusting."
Wednesday
Chris B commented on Sydni Moser's group Coffee Break
"That's disgusting! That is breaking down science from inside out!"
Wednesday
Stephen Brodie commented on Sydni Moser's group Coffee Break
"'My university sacrificed ideas for ideology': Read the terrifying testimony of how…"
Wednesday

We are a worldwide social network of freethinkers, atheists, agnostics and secular humanists.

I want to get a few opinions on this logical fallacy.

 

I don't think it is always a fallacy, because, yes, you should attack an argument or opinion, but in the end, a person came up with, or just uses, that argument or opinion and a personal attack doesn't seem so bad anymore, because, if an argument is attacked, isn't the person that used it attacked as well, even if only because he used that argument, and even if in a less direct manner?

 

And sometimes a person's conduct, or motives matter in a discussion and it changes their argument(s) or view on the situation - for example, hypocrisy - pretending to have beliefs, opinions, virtues, feelings, qualities, or standards that one does not actually have.

 

So, are personal attacks understandable at any point in a conversation? What do the staff members of this forum think, since "Personal attacks are not allowed under any circumstance." (Guidelines)

Views: 158

Replies to This Discussion

When you attack an argument, idea or opinion, you leave the bearer an opportunity to pull back.

When you attack the person, that person will attack back.

It's much easier to admit that I was wrong than to admit that I'm an idiot.

Exactly. 

you leave the bearer an opportunity to pull back.

 

Most of us deal with religious people all the time and most of them do not pull back, no matter how many counterarguments you so politely present. What can you do then but attack the person, because, well, the argument sucks, but that person still uses it even after you destroyed it in various ways so it must be something wrong with the person. And you could avoid the person, but in most situations that is not really an option, because people like that are a big part of our lives. You can't avoid everyone.

 

What you say Michel makes sense, but not with this kind of people. After all, if you could reason with them, there would be nothing to complain about and we would not have this discussion or this forum.

So do you think that if you personally attack them that they will listen to you? If they won't listen to reason, I don't think anything else will help at that point. It is such a tricky area in my opinion. I'll admit that I'm quick to just end the conversation and move on or just leave in general.

"You can't avoid everyone."

And that's what makes the situation as sticky as warm honey bun!

Well, that was not what I had in mind. I was only asking if, after a certain point, attacking a person is understandable and acceptable, here or on another forum, or even in a face to face conversation. If they won't listen to reason, they won't listen to anything. That's pretty much what I think as well. But you should be able to try to attack the person as well, because it might help. It can happen. I am not talking about insults... but what is and isn't an insult after all? Saying that someone's idea, opinion or argument is stupid, isn't an insult? A lot of people take it as one. So it's only a matter of perspective. If I don't see attacking a person, in a civil way, as an insult, can I do it? Why not? If someone receives the attack on his/her arguments as a personal attack, should the person that made that attack be punished? Why not?

 

Basically, I am asking what is and isn't a personal attack if one can see everything (or nothing) as that.

"Basically, I am asking what is and isn't a personal attack if one can see everything (or nothing) as that."

I see. Like interventions?

Julien you love asking the tough questions. I like that. When you put it that way I'm back to thinking about it :)
But you should be able to try to attack the person as well, because it might help.

It is more likely to be of help to the attackant than to the target and to the forum. While being potentially very disruptive.
Well, I think it might help, but you should try it after all else has failed, even if you know that is a big chance it won't change anything, you should just try it. But do it in a civilized manner, and you won't harm the overall discussion, or the forum. You can say something like "Well, I have tried everything that I can and I have given you very good arguments against your ideas and opinions but you still hold on to them, so it must be something wrong with you." Can you Michel, as a moderator, see that as a personal attack and punish someone that says it, even though you do agree that the attacked person really has no (good) reasons for arguing and after the attacker has given many good arguments?

There's no set line.

It depends on the language and the context.

But I hope you realize that saying something like  "Well, I have tried everything that I can and I have given you very good arguments against your ideas and opinions but you still hold on to them, so it must be something wrong with you" as polite as it is, effectively terminates the discussion part of the debate.

Proceeding further and responding to your interlocutor's more than probable counter-attack would not be very productive and you'd probably choose at that point to avoid the debater in question.

Thus not personally incurring some irate mod's wrath =)

 

Well, some more talking wasn't part of what I had in mind after saying "Well, I have tried everything that I can and I have given you very good arguments against your ideas and opinions but you still hold on to them, so it must be something wrong with you". If there were anything left to be said, it would have been said before that point, and that would be my way of telling that person what I really think about him/her and if he/she is interested in another discussion with me, a little character revision is necessary, and thus closing the discussion from my part. I would avoid any more replies, even if attacked by that person. I don't think that I would break any rules or even be rude by any normal standards. Obviously, if that person did not understand good arguments, it would seem like an insult, but I don't care.
what is and isn't a personal attack

What is and what isn't a debate?

Well, a debate is every conversation you engage in by discussing opposing points.

RSS

© 2021   Created by Atheist Universe.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Service