Ah Hominem attacks what they look like, how you get them, and what to do about them

When you have been in bat on social media providing real facts about nuclear power you come to see that nearly all the anti’s arguments are fallacious ones.  They will move goal posts, cherry pick, and launch strawmen, anything to try and distract from the actual facts.  And when all that has failed, they will try and discredit you with ad hominem attacks.

While insults may form a part of an ad hominem attack not all insults are ad hominem attacks and not all ad hominem attacks include an insult. An ad hominem attack  is any comment of a personal nature that seeks to diminish your role in the argument while not actually contributing anything to it.  For example, I am routinely told by NIMBYs near the site of the Deep Geological Repository that my comments are not relevant because I do not live there.  It’s an attempt to alienate me.  But in fact, science does not change with location and my comments on the science remain relevant wherever I make them from.

Ad hominem attacks are frustrating and difficult to deal with.  At best they will be unfounded accusations that you cannot disprove simply because you can’t prove or disprove negatives.  But they may troll your background and find something out about you that they can use to discredit you.  And if none of that sticks they may simply make something up. 

And please don’t think that it only happens to people that get something wrong.  It doesn’t.  It happens to anyone who is prepared to write the truth about nuclear technologies. 

I have had all of these things happen to me. 

The worst was in Saskatoon where I had given a presentation to the university senate that the anti-nuclear brigade really did not like but in which they could find no actual fault.  Instead, they said that one of my slides was disrespectful to the First Nations because, they claimed, it depicted a First Nations person with a pea shooter.  They arranged to speak with the media so they could do a big reveal and destroy my career.  Fortunately, a color blow-up of the person with the pea shooter showed them to be a member of the Haddenham Rough Riders pea shooter team whose logo happens to be half a union jack.  The photo was also clearly marked as having been taken in Cambridge England.  Haddenham happens to be a Cambridgeshire village where my brother used to live.   The media dropped the story, but the accusation still lives in social media ten years later.

 A more frequent ad hominem accusation is that I am a paid shill of the NWMO.  It is the automatic accusation of any of the NIMBYs who are fighting the Deep Geologic Repository and who don’t like having facts thrown into their echo chamber. For the avoidance of doubt my work on social media is not supported by CNS, or anyone else, and I have never in my life received a cent from NWMO and suspect I never will.  I am certainly not planning on it.  (That said…if anyone does want to financially support my social media work please get in contact but be aware I will insist that I maintain full editorial control).

But once an ad hominem attack has happened what do you do?  If you defend yourself, they win, they have distracted from the debate that was going against them and made you look defensive, giving them the higher ground.  Avoid defending yourself and it looks like they have a point and your contribution will diminish in value.  It’s a rock and a hard place.

After years of frustration, I have a strategy that I try to apply (it’s often hard because the attacks elicit an emotional response).  It comes in three parts

1. Point out the ad hominem attack and observe that it is intended to distract from the debate.  This simple act gives you the higher ground by drawing attention to what is going on.
2. Address the attack itself in as few words as possible.  If you have the higher ground a simple denial may be enough.   
3. Return to the original discussion.

In a typical response people focus on defending against the attack. Even if this defense is done successfully the attacker has still won.  But by highlighting the purpose of the attack and then returning to the subject matter, the focus is moved from the attack back to the subject matter. 

Its not easy and I routinely forget myself but if you ever find yourself in this position you may find this approach helps. It does for me. 

Popular Core Business Articles

• Dealing with ad hominem attacks
• Is Nuclear Power “safe” and is there a “safe” level of radiation?
• Personal Experiences with Logical Fallacies in Nuclear Discussions
• The important differences between Hazard, Danger, Risk and Fear when considering a Deep Geologic Repository for used nuclear fuel.
• Deep Geologic Repositories (DGRs)?  Distressed purchase or Jewel in the Nuclear Crown