In the not-so-distant past, people would quibble over the definition of "ad hominem", arguing over the finer points of whether or not they were, by definintion, *really* attacking someone. That includes people who would use insulting terminology to classify someone's position (as in: "That argument is stupid"), ignoring the obvious fact that they were *still* insulting the person by implication. What they're really saying (or at least implying) is: "You'd have to be stupid to use that argument".
It's entirely possible to express one's disagreement with an argument someone's making without resorting to insults. Just as it's possible to have open, spirited discussions without directly insulting each other. We just have to respect each other.
All we really need to say in the rule is what you said: Respond to the argument and don't attack the person. |
