Sign up FAST! Login

How to make Isis fall on its own sword | Chelsea E Manning, The Guardian

Stashed in:

To save this post, select a stash from drop-down menu or type in a new one:

I have a co-worker who, for several months, commanded Manning.  As I write this, he's throwing a pretty good rant about the state of a world that takes seriously the opinion of a barely-competent traitor.

I'm not condoning Manning in any way at all, though I think the perspective is interesting, based on its own merits. I'm not posting this here because of who shared it - it could have been anyone. Also, keep in mind that the ad hominem fallacy is exactly that:

Would you trust a junior developer with only a couple of years of coding experience and under a standing policy of code review to speak on the techno-business strategy of a large corporation....  or a CTO?Granting Manning a soap box to stand on is doing exactly that.

For the most optimal decision making, it's best to consider all points of view, both for- and against- (whatever the issue may be), taking all of that as input, before making a decision. A CTO could take a Jr developers input and decide it's completely stupid, or maybe it's a novel new idea that could be somehow incorporated in the final solution (maybe not in its entire form). 

With all due respect, your argument is an ad hominem, because it focuses on the person (would you trust the CTO or the Jr Dev?), not the argument (what was the technical question being debated). To expand on this further, in your hypothetical situation, both persons should write down their arguments, names excluded, and then reviewers judge the merits of the argument without knowing who wrote it - kind of like a blind taste test.

If your friend who has an issue with Manning (which I can totally understand why) could actually logically attack Manning's statements (as opposed to the person's character), then it wouldn't be an ad hominem. 

Again, Manning did bad things and I want to be clear, this isn't me supporting Manning's previous actions in any way at all.

This isn't ad hominem, because I'm not arguing anything about the content of the article.

You May Also Like: