https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueAnon/comments/1ndsr3x/false_alarm/
Comedic effect achieved. Achieved so fucking hard. Every single one of my coworkers.
this post was submitted on 10 Sep 2025
207 points (100.0% liked)
chapotraphouse
14103 readers
757 users here now
Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.
No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer
Slop posts go in c/slop. Don't post low-hanging fruit here.
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Ad hominem wins again.
pedantry
also it's only the ad hominem fallacy if you say they're wrong because of whatever insult you're making. a simple insult or "you're wrong and a poopy head" isn't a fallacy at all.Ad sanguinem
Fallacies are premised on being wrong? In the writing/speaking classes I've taken, they're taught as stereotypes to avoid because you cheapen whatever argument you're making or things to identify in someone else's rhetoric as emotional manipulation.
informal logical fallacies is the general idea. the thing in particular that makes an ad hominem fallacy fallacious is that you're making a logical leap form "tim is a doodoo head" to "tim's argument is invalid". or the reverse for appeal to authority, the leap is from somebody being your boss or a celebrity to them being correct or trustworthy, and it's (platonically, there are quacks and frauds of course) not fallacious to take medical advice from a doctor.
Say Tim is a fascist. The argument is wrong because he's a fascist and I can recognise that at a larger ontological level. My response is "Tim, you're a doodoo head and I'm not going to bother with you." Is that still fallacious in that I'm making a leap from a logos argument to a pathos one which shuts down the entire debate for the purpose of attacking him? To me it's fallacious even if I'm right because I'm going against the spirit of jerking each other off in a debate where two mutually-exclusive ideas are valid. I just embrace the fallacy because dada.
gonna stop here, the argument isn't wrong because he's ideologically a fascist. the argument is wrong because of whatever lie he's telling.
anyway calling fash a shithead and not engaging isn't an error of logic in any way, it's just good sense in a situation where you can't punch or shoot him.
Fallacies cheapen arguments by being wrong/illogical, of course it only actually matters to debate perverts which is why politicians love fallacies
ah but it's fun to out-pervert the perverts because most of them don't know what they're talking about
But wrong and illogical aren't the same thing. I'm making a pathos argument when I say "Whatever your opinion was, you're stupid and I'm not going to pretend you're a serious person" because I want bystanders to pile on. It certainly isn't a logos response to whatever they said because they're a donkey-ass individual. I can be right though if they're saying something wrong and I'm not entertaining it. That's still a fallacy to me, they just aren't worth more than the laziest response I can give that hurts them.