Well at least the ad hom was aimed at ***ME***. πΏ
Anywaysβ¦
*βHe who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them. But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinionβ¦ Nor is it enough that he should hear the opinions of adversaries from his own teachers, presented as they state them, and accompanied by what they offer as refutations. He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe themβ¦ (H)e must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.β* John Stuart MILL,Β ππ― ππͺπ£π¦π³π΅πΊ.
βπΏππ¨ππ§ππ₯π©ππ€π£ π€π ππ©π§ππ¬ πππ£ βThe Straw Man fallacy is committed when a person simply ignores a person's actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented version of that position. β¦ This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because attacking a distorted version of a position simply does not constitute an attack on the position itself. One might as well expect an attack on a poor drawing of a person to hurt the person.β (nizkor[.]org/features/fallacies/straw-man.html)
And on a multiply related note,
βπΏππ¨ππ§ππ₯π©ππ€π£ π€π πππ πππ§π§ππ£π βA Red Herring is a fallacy in which an irrelevant topic is presented in order to divert attention from the original issue. The basic idea is to "win" an argument by leading attention away from the argument and to another topic. β¦ This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because merely changing the topic of discussion hardly counts as an argument against a claim.β (nizkor[.]org/features/fallacies/red-herring.html)
And in closing,
βππ¦π΄π΅πͺπ§πΊπͺπ―π¨: this objection is sometimes used when counsel is "leading" or "argumentative" or "assumes facts not in evidence".β (en.wikipedia[.]org/wiki/Objection_(United_States_law))
