Mamdouh Bitar, George Banna:
We must pay attention to the use of some logical fallacies, or common thinking errors, in the context of dialogues and discussions, There are several types of logical fallacies, the most important of which is the fallacy of personalization, which is useful to avoid because of its harmful consequences, It leads the discussion towards emptiness, absurdity, and nihilism, and it is originally a manifestation of backwardness and negative culture.
Personalization benefits no one, By definition, it can be said that personalization is judging an idea or thought based on the real or perceived person (party, movement, sect, etc.) to whom the idea or ideas are attributed, rather than on the content of the idea itself. Here, the person is dealt with capriciously, either by exalting them, thus deeming everything they say correct, or by belittling them, thus deeming everything they say wrong, Exalting or belittling a person is subject to the dictates of fanaticism, nationalism, religion, or other forms of prejudice, An Arab nationalist is always right in the eyes of another Arab nationalist, regardless of the opinion of another Arab nationalist; a Muslim is always right in the eyes of another Muslim, regardless of the opinion of another Muslim… Loyalty and disavowal reinforce all of this!
Personalization takes a different form than what was said, The person who has an idea that is parallel to mine is a great person, and the person who has an idea that is opposite to or contrary to mine is a sick dwarf, Personalization corrupts the evaluation of the idea by associating it with the type of person, and corrupts the evaluation of the person by associating him with the type of idea, Thus, personalization destroys either the idea or the person or both, and eliminates objectivity and hinders the discussion from reaching the correct or relative truth.
I write an article about a topic, and whatever the topic, the method of researching it, and the results of this research, there will be several typical reactions, including a reaction related to the topic, Some people see the error in this idea and the correctness in the other idea,The reaction here is directed entirely at the content of the topic, regardless of the person who wrote it, There is another reaction, which is personalization ,This reaction is directed at the person of the writer, The writer is hateful, the writer is superficial, the writer is crazy, he is a Zionist-American agent who hates and wants to eliminate Islam and undermine it, etc.
The personalized reaction in this case depends on a retrospective view of the person. If you, my dear, ever write an article that is critical or unpalatable to you, you will end up being classified as a dwarf, The ideas that a dwarf puts forward deserve condemnation, contempt, and disdain, The ideas of a dwarf are condemned even before they are known, On the other hand, liking an article elevates the person of its writer to the rank of the greats. Here, the matter may reach the point of sanctification, The great remains great, and the dwarf remains a dwarf, regardless of the type of person or the content of the text, whether it is positive or negative!
The number of occasions on which we and others have been subjected to such crude and personal attacks is unimaginable. How many times have we been described as dirty dogs or Western garbage dumps, insignificant people, outcasts, Francophones, etc.? This is the familiar pattern of inferiority reactions, and unfortunately, it has its popularity. There are other types of statements with other aims, such as “May God reward you, my brother,” “May your words be blessed,” “May God bless you,” and so on, the same old record of glorifying the person, glorifying or belittling! Both are hateful personalizations practiced by Islamists to a greater degree than others. Why?
It is cultural and intellectual weakness, lack of independence, and a lack of self-reliance in forming one’s own opinion, The more a person matures, progresses, and becomes capable of relying on himself and more independent, the more he tends towards objectivity,The free person with an active mind stays away from personalization, while the weak person with no will approaches it as a failed means of defense,It is total reliance on the text and a feeling of the dangers of deviating from this text, including the myth of being skinned alive daily and being burned on fire in hell, and other practices that even the most hardened criminals would refrain from.
Finally, we have a point that must be mentioned, which is that it is very difficult to completely separate the person from the idea and content of the text, but the necessary degree of separation must be sufficient to protect the discussion from the destructive effects of personalization!!!!!
,