Comments by "LancesArmorStriking" (@LancesArmorStriking) on "Do Transgender Athletes Have an Unfair Advantage?" video.

@brendanrichards3159 Sounds like an ad hominem to me. I don't know about his arguments, but you're not making a good case for your own intelligence by saying that, either.
1
@brendanrichards3159 No, you said he was "a horrible, horrible person, dishonest, vicious and cowardly." You can certainly make an argument based on dishonesty, even cowardice, but viciousness and being horrible? Those are terms with no concrete parameters. Those are subjective terms. That was an attack on his character, not his arguments. Even if I were to discount that, you didn't state that "Aaron Rainbolt said something dishonest". You said that he was a dishonest person. You clarified when I asked, but your original statement was, by definition, a description of his character, and not his claims. Def: (of an argument or reaction) directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining. That is what you did. You used an ad hominem. Just own up to it, I'm not a jury. Please.
1
@brendanrichards3159 Huh, it seems you're right, I apologize! Every source I had ever seen did not specify that the insult had a prerequisite of being done specifically to refute an argument. That being said, you still committed a fallacy- if you're going to disagree with him, don't post an insult. That's dangerously close to, if not outright, Poisoning the well.
1
@brendanrichards3159 Thank you for the correction, although I couldn't have known your intention when insulting, so I couldn't have distinguished between that fallacy and, as you said, just an insult. I'm also curious why exactly you think he's cowardly, horrible, and vicious (the first and third seem especially rare in tandem, so I suspect some emotional, rather than logical, reason for your words). Care to share?
1
@brendanrichards3159 I assure you, Dr. Freud, I'm perfectly fine! In all seriousness, please refrain from practising keyboard psychology, it's not a good look. I'm not getting where you see some 'determination' from me- replying to comments doesn't always have an emotional motivation. It is, for most people including myself, a way to pass the time. I also fail to realize where I'm engaging in bad-faith debate here- unless you think any questioning is trolling or attack (sealioning)? Hopefully not. As for your comment: -Again, cowardice and viciousness aren't easily quantifiable, so I don't think you'd even find a paper attempting to find incidence of both traits in people. So I agree, but I don't think we could even go through with your hypothetical. -I said the two were rare because viciousness (tends to, if we're talking about YouTube videos) require an aggressive, almost violent stance against another person. Like, cussing them out in a video. Which is something a cowardly person is unlikely to do. Viciousness is generally identified through certain actions; cowardice is the lack of (confrontational) action. -I'm genuinely just curious. I didn't know that EoT deleted dissenting comments from popular YouTubers on his videos (I'm assuming that's what you meant), that's why I went through this thread. That's very saddening to hear, though I still don't take it as an argument against his points, and because you didn't use an ad hominem, I take it you don't, either.
1
@d.l.7416 Careful, you're venturing into Jordan Peterson territory with that kind of vocabulary (i.e. what the hell do you mean by 'misrepresent?', when an argument against a claim has nothing to do with personal character).
1