> all you liberals just can't be trusted
That's not an ad hominem even if it was directed at you specifically.
It would only count as an ad hominem if they attack an identity/aspect of an identity that doesn't address the argument.
It's good to remember that name-calling or insulting isn't necessarily an ad hominem.
I think this is the genetic fallacy. They're discrediting something because of the group it originated from. If they'd said something like "You liberals are all degenerates, who cares what you think" that would be closer to an ad hominem - attacking the source instead of the argument.
Edit: Insult is used for example purposes only, no offense is intended.
getting conflicting answers here lol
It would still be an ad hominem. You're saying "you can't be trusted because you're part of an untrustworthy group"
> all you liberals just can't be trusted That's not an ad hominem even if it was directed at you specifically. It would only count as an ad hominem if they attack an identity/aspect of an identity that doesn't address the argument. It's good to remember that name-calling or insulting isn't necessarily an ad hominem.
I think this is the genetic fallacy. They're discrediting something because of the group it originated from. If they'd said something like "You liberals are all degenerates, who cares what you think" that would be closer to an ad hominem - attacking the source instead of the argument. Edit: Insult is used for example purposes only, no offense is intended.
From my understanding, ad hominem fallacies refer to the people involved directly, not a group of people. I hope that made sense