Ad Hominem

According to the adage associated with Eleanor Roosevelt, “great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people.”

While we may look askance at such a thought because of its elitism, the premise certainly holds true when it comes to argumentation.

One of the most common logical fallacies committed in argumentation, debate, discourse, and writing is argumentum ad hominem, Latin for “argument to the person,” often shortened to ad hominem. Ad hominem fallacies take place whenever a person ceases to argue, discuss, or dispute regarding the issue(s) at hand, and instead attack, deride, insult, or slander their opponents with a view of discrediting them before others and thereby casting aspersions on their arguments or ideas.

ad hominem tends to serve as a penumbra for a constellation of more specific logical fallacies; one could also understand a host of fallacies as specific applications and forms of ad hominem arguments. Guilt by association and tu quoque are common forms of ad hominem logical fallacies, attempting either to malign a person and their ideas by associating them with someone or something deemed odious, or by making an irrelevant appeal to perceived moral hypocrisy.

A good number of situations in which we find and see examples of ad hominem fallacies involve abuse and circumstance. Abusive ad hominem would involve the classic understanding of the fallacy: speaking evil or ill of a person as opposed to directly addressing their argument. Such evil speaking might well be slanderous. Abusive ad hominem pollutes discourse and inhibits discussion, which all too often seems to be the point: attempting desperately to get away from the arguments and ideas at the moment and focus on anything else. Such is what the prophet Jeremiah endured: he was almost universally denounced for prophesying YHWH’s messages; since no one could really argue with the messages on their merits, they would deride, insult, and mock Jeremiah (cf. Jeremiah 20:8-10). Our modern American political discourse, more often than not, quickly falls into forms of abusive ad hominem.

Circumstantial ad hominem involves pigeonholing people based on perceived circumstances and situations, attempting to dismiss arguments or ideas because, it is believed, people in those given circumstances must by necessity come to such conclusions. Circumstantial ad hominem is also part of the “genetic fallacy” category, imagining an argument proves invalid on account of the one arguing for it. More often than not, when a person’s age, gender, or race is brought up in terms of an argument, the goal is a circumstantial ad hominem, attempting to dismiss the argument because the person is male or female, white or black, young or old. This kind of fallacy also depends upon stereotyping and some form of reductionism.

Ad hominem fallacies prove appealing because they often work: the discourse is poisoned, discussions devolve into name-slinging, and people are sufficiently distracted from the issue at hand. Many who profess Jesus would even attempt to justify committing ad hominem fallacies, making much of Elijah’s mockery of the prophets of Baal in 1 Kings 18:27. Yet such appeals and desires tend to be motivated by less than godly and honorable motives, and seem derived from the demonic wisdom of this world (cf. James 3:13-18). Christians are called to not slander or speak evil of others (Titus 3:2, 1 Peter 3:1). Christians should not be known for abusive speech (Colossians 3:8). Nevertheless, Christians should expect to be the object of ad hominem fallacious arguments, but are not called upon to respond in kind (cf. 1 Peter 3:15-16). Few testimonies to the truth of God in Christ prove more powerful than responding to ad hominem by continuing to address the specific arguments or ideas at hand. But if we prove anxious and fearful in our arguments and discussions and commit ad hominem fallacies, how could we possibly give grace or well honor and reflect Christ in how we thus speak (cf. Ephesians 4:29)?

This final concern reflects the limitations of understanding ad hominem arguments as logical fallacies. We address ad hominem logical fallacies because when we make reference to the person as a strawman or a deflection from the argument, God in Christ is not glorified. Yet not all appeals to people, their beliefs, morals, and conduct, thus prove fallacious.

We do not live in a disembodied world of abstractions; we live in a world made by our Creator by means of His Word which would take on flesh and dwell among us as Jesus of Nazareth (cf. John 1:1, 14). Therefore, it is not wise for us to entirely separate arguments and ideas from people and their conduct. There will be times when moral hypocrisy genuinely happens and it might be productive to point it out. Sometimes people do maintain ungodly and unhealthy associations, and contract guilt from so doing (cf. 1 Corinthians 15:33, 2 John 1:6-10). And there will be times in which people’s experience will mean something in terms of an argument or an issue, and those who have not shared in that experience will struggle to come to a similar understanding of those matters.

Yet in these contexts appeals to a person’s behavior or their experience are not designed to deflect from the substance of the argument or discussion, but instead are marshaled as part of the substance of the argument or discussion in order to advance it.

The truth of God in Christ through the Spirit has never been demonstrated through reason alone; it has always featured the message of God proclaimed and embodied in practice, from Abraham through Moses and the prophets and most perfectly manifest in Jesus of Nazareth. The Apostles thus encouraged proclamation of the Gospel in word and deed (1 Peter 2:11-3:16); Jesus and the Apostles expected Christians to imitate their examples (John 13:1-15, 1 Corinthians 11:1, 1 Thessalonians 1:6, 2:14). To this end the Gospel of Jesus Christ never requires us to commit ad hominem fallacies; insulting or deriding opponents may feel intellectually satisfying but represents the demonic wisdom of this world, not the peaceable wisdom which comes from above. Yet most of our words will fall in vain if our lives do not manifest their truth: why should anyone do what we say if we do not even do so? To this end we do well to avoid ad hominem logical fallacies but instead faithfully embody the Lord Jesus Christ in word and deed by means of the Spirit to the glory of God the Father!

Ethan R. Longhenry