Running head: Ad Hominem 1

Rhetorical Concepts: Ad Hominem

Andre A. Voudy
University of Central Florida

AD HOMINEM 2
Abstract
This paper looks into the known evidence on the origins of the type of argument called
the ad hominem argument in modern logic textbooks, and introduces some evidence of modern
usage. It reveals the definition, historical references/roots, and the significance of the concept on
different cultures throughout eras.
Keywords: Concept, Popular Culture, Interpretation, Argumentative, Languages, Rhetoric.
AD HOMINEM 3

Definition
Simply put, definitions allow readers to decipher what exactly an author is trying to
convey in writing. Definitions can only portray, to a simplistic extent, the meaning of what the
word or concept stands for. In order to understand definitions or concepts, many different aspects
come into play like: historical meaning or references, the significance of the concept, and current
view or model of concept. Rhetorical Concepts engage in the explanation of fallacies and tactics,
using the definitions of the concepts as a starting point.
Ad Hominem
Ad Hominem or Argumentum Ad Hominem can be defined as a personal attack
directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining. This produces a directive
to point out physical or tangible flaws of the accused. In Latin, the literal translation of the words
Ad Hominem truly means Against the man. (INTERNAL CITATION)
With a concept deriving its meaning from a literal translation in another language, it is
easy to see that the concept has been used across cultures and has held its true meaning
throughout. Cases that occur consciously or unconsciously where people start to question the
opponent or his personal association to the topic at hand rather than judging on the
soundness/validity of the argument, exemplifies the basis of the rhetorical concept Ad
Hominem. Often when this concept is used, personal insults are tied in with the fallacy of Ad
Hominem. Normally these insults are subtly used but nevertheless they are used and represent a
key component in identifying the usage of Ad Hominem. Arguers who are normally not familiar
in the principles of making logical argument will fall back on this fallacy. Arguers who allow
themselves to use this concept commonly end up saying something to draw the audiences
AD HOMINEM 4
attention away from the topic of discussion and direct it towards distasteful characteristics of the
accused. This embodies a diversion tactic and is used as a tool to deceive rather than to
reveal. Typically, even the arguer himself believes that such personal traits or circumstances
are not enough to dispose of an individuals opinion or argument. However, if looked at
rationally, such arguments even if true never provide a valid reason to disregard someones
criticism. (INTERNAL CITATION)
Historical References. Two hypotheses about the roots of the Ad Hominem are
considered. One is that it came from Aristotle and elaborated on by Locke. Locke called ad
hominem the type of argument when one party 'presses' another with 'consequences drawn from
his own principles or concessions. The other possible origin is that it may have had separate
roots in ancient philosophical writings that criticized philosophers for not practicing what they
preached. (INTERNAL CITATION)
Both hypotheses alluded to subfallacies of Abusive and Circumstantial. These are the
ways in which Ad Hominem have been classified. A Circumstantial Ad Hominem is one in which
some irrelevant personal circumstance surrounding the opposition is offered as evidence against
their position. An Abusive Ad Hominem occurs when an attack on the character or other
irrelevant personal qualities of the opposition, such as appearance, is offered as evidence against
their position. Both result in a fallacy usage. Aristotle mentions thirteen sources of fallacious
reasoning in parts 4 and 5 of his On Sophistical Refutations. He stated that fallacies are
connected with the meanings of words and their pronunciation. In the case of Ad Hominem, this
is especially true due to the literal translation of it.
Significance of Concept. After reviewing the definition and the origin/historical
reference of the fallacy, the significance or usage in the modern world would subsequently
AD HOMINEM 5
take up an integral part of the research. Fallacies are commonly used in the modern world but Ad
Hominems usage allows itself to stand-out on Aristotles long list of fallacies in the Political
side of the modern era. Smear Campaigning is what the fallacy is known as when election
seasons come about nowadays. (OBAMA DISCUSSION POST)
Summary. (Wrap up with Pop Culture examples)




PLEASE, PROOF-READERS PROVIDE ME WITH AN ELABORATION ON MY IDEAS
BECAUSE I CAME TO A POINT OF REDUNDENCY AND IM HAVING A HARD TIME
TRYING TO CONVEY THE REFERENCE TO THE THREE MAIN CASE POINTS OF
DEFINITION, HISTORICAL REFERENCES, AND SIGNFICANCE.
AD HOMINEM 6
References
OBVIOUSLY THIS IS NOT APA. I WILL FILL IN PROPERLY FOR FINAL DRAFT.

-http://www.fallacyfiles.org/adhomine.html
-http://www.dougwalton.ca/papers%20in%20pdf/01roots.pdf
-http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ad%20hominem
-http://literarydevices.net/ad-hominem/
-Dialogues class Textbook