Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: greenspirit who wrote (57891)	10/8/1999 9:52:00 AM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 108807

Although it has come to mean, more narrowly, an attack on a person in order to discredit his arguments, this is the broader meaning of the phrase: Hypertext Webster Gateway: "ad hominem" From Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913) (web1913) Ad hominem \Ad hom"i*nem\ [L., to the man.] A phrase applied to an appeal or argument addressed to the principles, interests, or passions of a man. [My note: the implication is an irrelevant appeal]. Being insulting is not necessarily ad hominem, although it may be rude, as long as one addresses the arguments properly as well. Not openly insulting someone may be ad hominem, if one let's insinuation carry the argument, rather than addressing a person's points. Trying to move a jury to exceed the evidence with a passionate closing argument designed to inflame their indignation at a crime, and arouse their desire to pin it on someone, would be ad hominem. In a civil suit, trying to enlist the jury's pity in order to move it to raid a deep pocket in excess of liability is ad hominem....

To: greenspirit who wrote (57891)	10/8/1999 10:19:00 AM
From: Edwarda	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 108807

Addressing the first part of your posting, consider the source. Certain people seem to enjoy taking this sort of posture. I tend to ignore them whenever possible, although I can't say that I am always successful in the effort to do so. <rueful smile> There is one potentially very good outcome of this flare up: We are all doing some thinking about what the ground rules of our debates should be. We are being reminded quite forcibly that there are real people at the other side of each posting, not merely formless fingertips at a keyboard in a vacuum.

To: greenspirit who wrote (57891)	10/8/1999 10:25:00 AM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

Michael, Nihil actually has quite a dry sense of humor, and the linked post by him was hilarious. Lighten up!

To: greenspirit who wrote (57891)	10/8/1999 2:11:00 PM
From: nihil	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 108807

Unfortunately you (I really meant Michael M.) are not a student in my class. I insist on the search for truth. One problem on this thread is the widespread belief in myths. And cowardly behind the back insults. I treasure controversy in class, and always reward those with the guts to quarrel with me with an A. Of course, nearly all my students earn A's because I grade on performance. And nearly all of them argue with me. They never whine about my use of words as you complainers do --- let me quote a sentence from a recent student review. ".....(omitting "he is brilliant", no need to toot my own horn) ... he always treats his students as professionals."