Question

...

There is no difference between these two fallacies.

Just finished the book and it seems that, "bulverism" is exactly the same as an ad hominem, stating that an argument cannot be true because of the character.

 

A great example of an ad hominem is Saying that someone who doesn't have a uterus cannot have an opinion on abortion.

 

A great example of bulverism is saying that someone without a uterus cannot have a valid opinion on abortion either.

 

Even when two of these fallacies are described, ad hominem (abusive) just means to discredit an argument by talking about the character, where as bulverism is said to be the same, a combination of the genetic fallacy (because of the character being the source) and circular reasoning (why they are wrong).

In an ad hominem, the genetic fallacy could be shown when the person criticises who is talking by simply trying to argue by saying, "Oh look who is talking, the guy that doesn't even go to school", and circular reasoning where the person using the ad hominem ASSUMES that that must be the reason why are they not correct.

So is there any difference whatsoever?

asked on Tuesday, Jan 04, 2022 01:09:24 PM by

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."

Uncomfortable Ideas: Facts don't care about feelings. Science isn't concerned about sensibilities. And reality couldn't care less about rage.

This is a book about uncomfortable ideas—the reasons we avoid them, the reasons we shouldn’t, and discussion of dozens of examples that might infuriate you, offend you, or at least make you uncomfortable.

Many of our ideas about the world are based more on feelings than facts, sensibilities than science, and rage than reality. We gravitate toward ideas that make us feel comfortable in areas such as religion, politics, philosophy, social justice, love and sex, humanity, and morality. We avoid ideas that make us feel uncomfortable. This avoidance is a largely unconscious process that affects our judgment and gets in the way of our ability to reach rational and reasonable conclusions. By understanding how our mind works in this area, we can start embracing uncomfortable ideas and be better informed, be more understanding of others, and make better decisions in all areas of life.

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
1

The ad hominem (abusive) generally is an attack on one's character and bulverism uses the genetic fallacy where the origin of the argument is evaluated rather than the argument itself. So while they can overlap like in your example, they don't have to. For example, if someone dismissed an argument because it came from the Bible, that would be the genetic fallacy, not an ad hominem.

answered on Tuesday, Jan 04, 2022 07:25:39 PM by Bo Bennett, PhD

Bo Bennett, PhD Suggested These Categories

Comments

...
0
Ed F writes:

I would say that Bulverism is a type of Ad Hominem (which in turn is a type of Genetic Fallacy).  Like other forms of Ad Hominem, it attacks the arguer, rather than the merits of the argument.  Specifically, it assumes ab initial that the conclusion is false (without considering the merits of the argument) and proceeds to "explain" to the arguer how they came up with this "silly" idea.  

posted on Wednesday, Jan 05, 2022 06:19:02 PM