Donald Annoying Orange Announces His Run for Presidency

[Frequency]

There are very few people who correctly call out 'ad hominem' and even fewer who actually make ad hominem attacks.

required reading:
http://laurencetennant.com/bonds/adhominem.html

so in short, did either happen with this big exchange? I'm just trying to pick up where I left off

[Ad Bot]

[SeventhSandwich]

Ah, but wouldn't this be a mathematical fallacy? Your conclusion is that we should read that article because there are few people who call out 'ad hominem' attacks and even fewer who make them.

No, I couldn't even be bothered to read the accusations people have made in this thread.

I'm just linking some helpful literature.

[IkeTheGeneric]

so in short, did either happen with this big exchange? I'm just trying to pick up where I left off

Not really... Zombi just said that Kaz's statement was stupid

[$trinick]

No, I couldn't even be bothered to read the accusations people have made in this thread.

I'm just linking some helpful literature.

That wouldn't make it not a fallacy. You stated mathematical reasoning that is not true as support for a conclusion; which constitutes a mathematical fallacy.

# Of Fallacies Committed >= # Of Fallacies Correctly Identified
This is a true statement by nature.

Your argument asserts that # Of Fallacies Committed < # Of Fallacies Correctly Identified.

[Dreams_Of_Cheese]

There are very few people who correctly call out 'ad hominem' and even fewer who actually make ad hominem attacks.

required reading:
http://laurencetennant.com/bonds/adhominem.html

actually really fun to read