My knowledge of logical fallacy is by no means extensive, and my English skills in general are more than rusty, but something has been bothering me. As long as there have been people, language and political bloggers there has been fallacy. Personally, I’m a fan of ad hominem, that’s why this caught my attention.

In the current edition of Skeptic Magazine, the article The Great Debate: Deepak Chopra v. Michael Shermer focuses on the value of skepticism. Chopra maintains that skepticism, “turns destructive, using disdainful dismissiveness as its chief tactic.” He targets skeptical critiques by stating in the first point of his numbered list, “I have rarely met a skeptic who didn’t use ad hominem attacks.”

If we skip down to number four of Chopra’s reasons why skepticism is invalid, we see, “Skeptics believe that doubt is a positive attribute. Skeptics in person can be appealing, usually in a kind of quirky misanthropic way, although most come off as self-important petty naysayers who try everyone’s patience.”

Here’s another example of ad hominem: Deepak Chopra is a fucking idiot.