Aziz Ansari Doesn't Pick Up On "Non-Verbal Cues" and Gets Treated Like A Rapist

[Edwardo Piet]

Ad hominem attacks are not arguments, they're ad hominem attacks.

It's a fine line, but yeah. Say your argument is that a person can't be a train operator because said person has a crippling learning disability, it's not a nice thing to have to say, but it's a valid argument. You could argue that a person isn't actually a nice person because they act like an asshole all the time. If the latter is true, it's an argument because it follows the premise. If you just say, "You're wrong about this because you're an asshole," that's an ad hom. Of course, there are a million other examples, but I think it's important sometimes to make clear that unless it's used as part of the argument, it's not an ad hom. It's just an insult. And, it might be insulting, but it might not be an ad hom. Distinctions.

I'm not sure what ad hom you're talking about though. I didn't catch one.

It's nice to see someone else who actually gets what the Ad Hominem fallacy is.

99% of people just use it as a synonym for insulting someone during a debate. Because they don't actually understand the fallacy at all.