“Just Being Mean”

Question

Mandi	“Just Being Mean” Hi again Bo and community of logical fallacians, “You disagree with him (or you don’t accept his argument) because you harbor hatred in your heart and you only want to see him fail. You’re just being mean. [Therefore your argument is invalid.]” Ad Hominem - Abusive / Appeal to Motive, or are there other potential classifications? Cheers! +bonus if you can guess the original subject of the suspected fallacy.
	asked on Wednesday, Jan 31, 2018 05:18:35 AM by Mandi
Top Categories Suggested by Community
Comments

Want to get notified of all questions as they are asked? Update your mail preferences and turn on "Instant Notification."

Eat Meat... Or Don't.

Roughly 95% of Americans don’t appear to have an ethical problem with animals being killed for food, yet all of us would have a serious problem with humans being killed for food. What does an animal lack that a human has that justifies killing the animal for food but not the human?

As you start to list properties that the animal lacks to justify eating them, you begin to realize that some humans also lack those properties, yet we don’t eat those humans. Is this logical proof that killing and eating animals for food is immoral? Don’t put away your steak knife just yet.

In Eat Meat… Or Don’t, we examine the moral arguments for and against eating meat with both philosophical and scientific rigor. This book is not about pushing some ideological agenda; it’s ultimately a book about critical thinking.

Get 20% off this book and all Bo's books*. Use the promotion code: websiteusers

* This is for the author's bookstore only. Applies to autographed hardcover, audiobook, and ebook.

Get the Book

Answers

Bo Bennett, PhD 0	I would say that this is a claim based on perspective. If the person saying this were to add "I suspect" before the statement, I would see nothing wrong with it (logically). Of course, the person's opinion could be totally off-base. People who do harbor hatred or ill will towards another do have strong bias that often leads to disagreement with the person. This is not uncommon. I would say that this is a good opportunity to respond with "No, I disagree with him because he is making wild claims contrary to all known evidence such as..." Bonus: Subject is Trump
	answered on Wednesday, Jan 31, 2018 05:49:36 AM by Bo Bennett, PhD
Comments

NJH 0	Unless there is clear evidence that the fellow is mean and hateful - I would call this the "I can mind-read" move. Claiming to have special knowledge that one does not have access to. A belief, a kind of fake or pretend knowledge. To which I would respond "I cannot see into peoples' hearts - I am not a mind reader - and neither are you.
	answered on Thursday, Feb 01, 2018 04:35:07 PM by NJH
Comments