trustmebro.to/r/…
✓ checked
trust me, bro:
here is the receipt.
the claim

Ad hominem always makes an argument invalid.

the verdict
REFUTED
the evidence says no
Recorded sources
0 sources for · 3 against

Counts group repeated records of the same source within each side. They do not measure evidence strength or source independence.

Is it true that Ad hominem always makes an argument invalid?

No. A reference article on ad hominem states that attacking the arguer does not disprove the premise and does not make the statement less credible logically, and a peer-reviewed paper notes textbook treatments of the ad hominem fallacy distort how such arguments actually work.

Verdict: REFUTED · 0 sources for, 3 against · Last checked

The private library was unavailable for some searches in this check. Missing library results are not evidence against the claim.

Evidence against · 3
Ad hominem - Wikipedia
Get citation
Ad hominem - Wikipedia. (n.d.). en.wikipedia.org. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

See more details
More against · 2
Discounting Testimony with the Argument Ad Hominem and a Bayesian Congruent Prior Model
2015
Get citation
Jaydeep-Singh, B. & Mike, O. (2015). Discounting Testimony with the Argument Ad Hominem and a Bayesian Congruent Prior Model. eric.ed.gov. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000151

Complexity, Relevance and Character: Problems with Teaching the "Ad Hominem" Fallacy
2003
Get citation
Stephen, d. W. (2003). Complexity, Relevance and Character: Problems with Teaching the "Ad Hominem" Fallacy. eric.ed.gov. https://doi.org/10.1111/1469-5812.00004

Receipt History
Anyone with this link can read the claim and its public receipt, including any personal information in that text. Open permanent receipt.
Check your own claim
Challenge the receipt
Requests are recorded for review. This does not start an automatic check or guarantee a response time.

Citation formatting by citeproc-js (Frank Bennett) and the Citation Style Language project. Source and licenses.

This receipt is an automated verdict against our published method · not an opinion about any author or publication.
Terms · Privacy · How verdicts work