Ad Antiquitam Appealing to convention or traditional action as a proof of validity.
Ad hoc Simply means directed to a single proposition or issue−no further implications intended. A proliferation of ad hoc adjustments to a theory indicates a crisis in acceptability.
Ad hominem (abusive) Attacking the behavior or character of the man instead of his argument. Appealing to emotions and/or prejudices rather than to intellect or reason.
Ad Novitam Appealing to modernity or newness as a proof of validity.
Associationism Implying that an associative relationship is a causative one.
Affirming the Consequent Within valid logic structure when we say that if A is true then B is true, we must prove A to be true in order to conclude that B is true. Affirming the consequent is to erroneously conclude that A is true upon finding that B is true.
Authoritarianism Unquestioning reliance on an authority or expert.
Composition Fallacy Applying to the whole the properties of the parts.
Defeatism Claiming an end is impossible to achieve as a reason for not following a line of reason.
De fide Literally "of faith", but implying revealed by god and requiring unconditional assent.
Denying the Antecedent Within valid logic structure when we say that if A is true then B is true, we must not assume B to be false because A is false. Denying the antecedent is to erroneously conclude that B is false upon finding that A is false.
Derision Using an emphasis on ridicule to assail a premise or argument.
Dis-accreditation The ploy of pointing out a lack of formal accreditation on the other side.
Disaffirmation A contradiction or repudiation of a premise formerly stated or agreed upon.
Dismissal Dismissing a premise, hypothesis or theory before hearing the argument.
Dis-qualification Excusing oneself by the ploy of being formally or academically unqualified.
Division Fallacy Applying to the part what may be true of the whole.
Dogmatism Unwarranted or arrogant stating of opinion or position.
Equivocation Using the same term or word in different and incomparable senses.
Enthusiasm Originally implying supernatural inspiration, it is often used to try to override logic.
Exaggeration Overemphasizing to an extreme degree.
False Analogy An offering of resemblances that don't really imply essential similarity.
Gamblers Fallacy Thinking that some pattern of the past has an influence on a truly random event.
Genetic Fallacy The Origin of something is erroneously ascribed.
Ignotum per ignotius
The attempt to defend an assertion against criticism by deriving it from some
Illogical Based on faulty logic.
Invalid Emphasis Accenting or stressing a word or phrase in a sentence where that accent or emphasis changes the probably received meaning..
Invalid Syllogism A syllogism is a major premise, minor premise and valid conclusion such as: All virtues are laudable, kindness is a virtue; therefore kindness is laudable. An invalid form would be: Some Danes are dogs, Lars is a Dane; therefore Lars is a dog.
Irrelevance Where an argument that may support one conclusion is used to support another, or where the argument is misguided or oblique to the issue at hand.
Hyper-limitation Intentionally and/or needlessly limiting the number of options or possibilities.
Hypocrisy* Originally meant lacking in judgment or lacking the quality of careful and critical thinking. Now used here to denote an agenda other than to arrive at the truth.
Loaded Questions Asking questions where no simple response can be reasonable, or where any response implies acceptance of what is asserted as part of the question.
Mala fide With intent to deceive.
Mal entendu Misunderstood or poorly conceived.
Mal absurdum Mis-characterization or invalid reduction to an absurdity..
Misinform To supply with misleading information.
Non-comparable Not worthy of comparison.
Non sequitur Latin for out of sequence, a break in the chain of logic with an unwarranted leap.
Obscurum per obscurius Any arguement that proves more obscure than what it supposedly clarifies.
Pedantism A demand to prove the case within the conventional framework..
Petitio principii Assuming in the premise of an argument the conclusion which is to be substantiated; a form of circular reasoning.
Post Hoc Ergo Prompter Hoc An argument that implies that since A preceded B in time, A caused B.
Proton Pseudos First or fundamental falsity or error. Many times arguments start with this up front or as a hidden assumption.
Red Herring Raising an issue or challenge that is not relevant or is simply a distraction from the issue at hand.
Reductionism Any method or theory that reduces data, information or processes to seeming equivalents that are less complex or developed than is the actual case.
Reification The attempt to make a purely abstract idea or concept into a real-world extant entity.
Simplistic Demand Demanding a simple or inadequate answer to a complex question or issue.
Special Pleading Using a double-standard to require less rigorous treatment for one's own assertion than one would use against a counter assertion.
Straw man Arguing against a premise no one has taken, knocking that premise down, and then assuming or implying that you have then discredited the original at question.
Tautology A form of needless repetition or circular reasoning that does not advance understanding.
Ultra-Symbolism Confusing the symbol with the reality for which it stands.Unilateralism Taking into account only one side of an issue or matter.
* Most men of good will would say they place the highest priority on knowing the truth, and they would deny being willing to deliberately promulgate falsehood for no higher purpose than to win an argument or to defend a personal position. These men would all claim to value the truth over what they really value more. It is in this most fundamental way−men pay lip service to the truth, then let personal agendas override−that we are using the terms hypocritical and hypocrisy. Any man driven to use invalid techniques can be considered to be a hypocrite.
Mikamar Publishing and the editors of the thunderbolts.info site are dedicated to being circumspect and honorable in their presentation of material and their arguments for support of positions. We pledge ourselves to avoid using these invalid argument techniques.