Do you resort to personal attacks when your argument fails?

Question

I asked a question which was critical of Bush and the Surge. A few conservatives had no rebuttal except for a single line personal attack. (Examples)
"The surge didnt fail. But your parents did."
"it hasnt failed but you have at life"
"I assume you are just some Code Pink hackjob trying to spread your propaganda."
A couple more attached a parting shot to their rebuttal but at least they had a rebuttal. My skin is a little too thick to be penetrated by juvenile tactics. But what does that say about our schooling? Are we no longer able to engage in intellectual debate?

Do you challenge the issue or the person questioning the issue?

Bwana just because you disagree does not mean the question was unintelligent or provocative? It reflected an opinion and was backed by quotes and links. Those who are unable to respond intelligently should consider that maybe their opinion is simply wrong.

Answer 1

No. I wouldn't argue something I wasn't sure about. Of course I challenge issues. I also challenge an individual to back up their claim. I expect the same of myself. We already know we can't trust Hillary, her husband, or Charles Manson, but it appears even we who are not the criminals they are, must also prove anything, and everything we say and do.

Answer 2

No, if I don't know what i'm talking about or anything about what is being asked then what is the point of even speaking. There are enough idiots out there for that, I don't have time to waste my breathe.

It is about the issue that is what a debate is about. Unfortunately even out candidates for Presidency resort to such childish tactics of attacking the "self" vs sticking to the point!

Our schooling does not encourage a good debate neither does it encourage kids to be eloquent in speech. Kids sit in their chairs when asked a question and just say "that's stupid" or just laugh off a question because they don't pay attention to what is going on around in the world.

People are too self absorbed to really care about what anyone has to ask or say for that matter.

Answer 3

IMO people who be responsive to they are contained in the incorrect facet of a falling argument save on many times making their factor returned and returned returned in new and distinctive techniques, style lof such as you're doing this night. Jeez we already heard you. it is not likely like an argument is it? that is basically which you like eating lifeless animals, and you be responsive to that as a fashion to be eating basically slightly meat, a residing being which might have RUN faraway from you, died, in order that which you would be able to consume it. Meat isn't a necessary nutrient and the nutrition contained in it are obtainable in lots of places. Having to kill and abuse a stay animal to get those issues once you may get them someplace else greater fee-effective, without growing to be yet another cow with the help of synthetic insemination and reducing down an acre of jungle, is in order that ******* wasteful and grasping. you like eating meat, and don't like it that some each and every person is on an ethical and ethical slant approximately not doing it- ethcially that's stable to recycle, that is yet another ethical place. well-being themes too. Ethically , being violent to an animal they you be responsive to might quite not be there, and can quite run away, is faulty, ordinary as that. that is incorrect. A bear isn't merciless to a fish, it basically desires the fish through fact a bear will die if it eats cheese. despite if lifeless animal eating gave human beings NO well-being themes in any respect, that depart the certainty that that's violent and aggressive in a worldwide that doesn't require itk nor has it ever required it as quickly as upon a time we ate nuts seeds and flora, so it is not abruptly. lifeless animals creates cancerous growths in human bodies while their flesh is eaten with the help of the human beings. that is certainty. i be responsive to you do't like it, yet that is positive , all of us do stuff all of us be responsive to is undesirable for us deep down. There I sid something with regard to the issue you're moaning approximately in different posts you have made this night. pass take a walk, you're all wound up.

Answer 4

I try to challenge an issue and not the person, but the majority of the people I come in contact with don't even realize there's a difference.

Answer 5

...you just have to remember that there are many kids on here that just like to stir things up.
there are also many die hard bush fans and no matter how goofy our leader gets they will get very upset if anyone questions his actions.
also there are those that just have no intelligent answers and figure if they attack you personally it will draw attention away from the issues.
i know that this really doesn't answer your question but i just can't put myself in the minds of people like that. i would have to lower my I.Q. at least 50 points before i would have to resort to things like that.
i mean just take a look at the first answer from santy clause to this question and you see why.

Answer 6

I find the Sean Hannity/Bill O'Reilly (ad hominem) style of arguing to be in extremely poor taste.

I get more satisfaction in presenting the facts & then allowing others to come to their own conclusions. In my opinion, people that are ROUTINELY combative & use personal attacks as a response to a question - are incapable of providing substantive responses.

(red herring are their best friends)

Answer 7

i am first to admit when ime wrong....so no personal attack is ever called for.......although im getting on in years..i still am willing to learn from the young as well as the old....knowledge is a power full thing to possess so ime always willing to hear the other side of a argument..rather than in force mine onto somebody..without the facts.to back them up......seamanab..............i agree with l.b.m.....what a great man...martin luther king was

Answer 8

Because it was a question solely designed to provoke such responses, and as such, it merited those responses.

Intellectual debates start with intelligent questions, not smartass questions. There's a difference.

Answer 9

Do you actually listen to the counter argument???

I'm sick to people giving low ratings just because they don't agree w/ me. If you are one of those, you deserve it. If not, the responders are just childish assholes.

Answer 10

No. I am not a liberal, so I can use truth and logic instead of personal attacks based on my feelings.