- > ad hominem
Hardly-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem
> Ad hominem (Latin for "to the person"),[1] short for argumentum ad hominem, typically refers to a fallacious argumentative strategy whereby genuine discussion of the topic at hand is avoided by instead attacking the character, motive, or other attribute of the person making the argument, or persons associated with the argument, rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself.
You failed at the "genuine discussion" part by citing pop econ horseshit.
- > Yes, but why Jefferson
Because they thought Jeffersons thoughts on the matter were relevant.
> Why not Arglebargle?
Because I know what that word means.
> Or me?
Because "lisper central banks" doesn't produce any meaningful results in a search engine.
> I have musings on the topic of central banks, would you like to hear them?
Sure.
- > Also, Radvocate, wondering if you can address the PII concerns other's have raised, as that is a very big deal.
For credit cards at least, you aren't giving any more information to them than you would any random website where you make a purchase.
Less, even, as there's no expiration date or CVV.
- > Serious question: does this spell doom for people with ADHD?
Caveat: undergrad in math, working on a part time coursework masters (I'm hoping to talk someone into being my advisor for a part time thesis)
No more so than any other academic subject.
If anything, I've found math more friendly to my ADHD than philosophy, literature, etc.
No, it's a general attack on anyone that cites horseshit.