What type of argument is made against the writer, rather than against the writer's argument?

The type of argument made against the writer, rather than against the writer's argument, is known as an ad hominem argument. The term "ad hominem" is Latin for "to the person" and refers to a fallacy that involves attacking the character, motive, or other attribute of the person making the argument, rather than addressing the substance of the argument itself. This tactic is often used to undermine the opponent's position by casting doubt on their credibility or motivations, rather than engaging with the actual points they are making.

Ad hominem arguments are considered a form of logical fallacy because they do not address the validity or soundness of the argument presented. Instead, they distract from the topic at hand by shifting the focus to the individual. This can be an effective rhetorical strategy in persuading an audience, especially if the audience holds negative views of the person being attacked, but it is generally seen as a poor form of reasoning in logical and critical thinking contexts.

There are several types of ad hominem attacks, including:

1. Abusive ad hominem: Directly attacking the person's character or reputation.
2. Circumstantial ad hominem: Suggesting that the person is biased or has a vested interest and therefore their argument is not trustworthy.
3. Tu quoque ("you also"): Accusing the person of hypocrisy or inconsistency, implying that this undermines their argument.
4. Guilt by association: Discrediting an argument by associating the person with an unpopular or disreputable group or individual.

It's important to note that not all personal criticisms are ad hominem fallacies. If the character or actions of the person are directly relevant to the argument or claim they are making, then discussing these aspects may be valid. However, when such criticisms are irrelevant to the argument and used solely to discredit the individual, they constitute an ad hominem fallacy.