In rhetoric, an ad hominem attack, Latin for “to the person,” shifts focus from the argument to the individual presenting it. Essentially, it’s an attempt to discredit the message by discrediting the messenger.

A classic example is when Winston Churchill described Mahatma Gandhi as “a seditious Middle Temple lawyer now posing as a fakir.” Churchill aimed to diminish Gandhi’s credibility by attacking his character and background.

This tactic, targeting a speaker’s ethos, has ancient roots. Even the esteemed Roman orator Cicero frequently employed it, once labeling Piso, Julius Caesar’s father-in-law, a “most foul and inhuman monster.”

Cicero’s opening line in his First catilinarian speech exemplifies an extended ad hominem:

When,O catiline,do you mean to cease abusing our patience? How long is that madness of yours still to mock us? When is there to be an end to that unbridled audacity of yours,swaggering about as it does now?

The Ethics of Personal attacks

In academic discourse,the ad hominem is generally considered a logical fallacy. It’s seen as uncivil, hindering productive debate, and signaling a weak argument. It’s prohibited in formal debates, and some have even called for its ban in the U.K.’s House of Commons.

However, in the realm of rhetoric, where persuasion is paramount, an ad hominem can be a valid tool if it effectively undermines the credibility, or ethos, of an opponent’s claims.

When launching a personal attack, it can be more effective to attribute the criticism to a third party or employ paralipsis (drawing attention to something by claiming you won’t mention it), as Cicero demonstrated in his speech For the Caelio:

Clodia, I am not thinking now of the wrongs you have done me. I am putting to one side the memory of my humiliation. I pass over your cruel treatment of my family when I was away. Consider that nothing I have said has been said against you.

I’m not calling Mr. DeSantis a racist; I’m simply saying the racists believe he is a racist.

During a debate with Ron DeSantis, Andrew gillum, a former Florida gubernatorial candidate, masterfully used both techniques:

I’m not calling mr. DeSantis a racist; I’m simply saying the racists believe he is a racist.

The impact of this single sentence propelled Andrew Gillum into the spotlight. Often, a person’s legacy boils down to a few key opinions, if even that.

Strategies for Defending Against Personal Attacks

If you find yourself the target of an ad hominem, consider these four responses:

1. Ignore it.
2. Identify it as an ad hominem, stating, “Instead of attacking me, please address the argument, which you seem to be avoiding.”
3. Acknowledge and own the criticism.
4. Respond with an ad hominem of your own.

The best approach depends on the situation and available details. However, if a strong retort isn’t readily available, ignoring the insult while appearing slightly discomfited is often the most effective tactic.

if you choose to return an ad hominem, consider accompanying it with a gesture, a rhetorical device known as mycterismus. A well-timed, humorous gesture can leave your opponent reeling.