Monthly Archives: January 2013

Proof by Verbosity (argumentum verbosium, proof by intimidation) – submission of an argument too complex and verbose for others to reasonably deal with in all its intimate details. Refutation: Respond to one claim at a time and stay on point … Continue reading →

Correlation Proves Causation (cum hoc ergo propter hoc) : a faulty assumption that correlation between two variables implies that one causes the other. Refutation: statistical correlation is not causation. The only way to prove causation is to repeat the event … Continue reading →

Guilt by Association  (guilt by association) – arguing that because two things share a property they are the same. Refutation: Although two things may share one property, that does not mean they share any more properties than the one. Example … Continue reading →

Reductio ad Hitlerium (playing the Nazi card) – comparing an opponent or their argument to Hitler or Nazism in an attempt to associate a position with one that is universally reviled. Refutation: This is just a specific type of Argument … Continue reading →

Argument to Moderation (false compromise, middle ground, fallacy of the mean) – assuming that the compromise between two positions is always correct. Refutation:  Although finding middle or common ground for practical purposes of working together has value, this does not … Continue reading →

Burden of Proof (onus probandi): Requiring the hearer to disprove the speaker’s claim rather than requiring the speaker to support her/his claim. Refutation: The burden of proof to demonstrate the truth of a claim is on the person making the … Continue reading →

Faulty Dilemma: Giving someone only two options to choose from (with the goal of them choosing the lesser of two evils) when, in reality, there are more options available. Refutation: Except when the choices are a set of contradictions, there … Continue reading →

Too Long Ago to Matter: Asserting that because an event occurred so far in the past that it is not relevant today. Refutation: The emotional impact of events diminishes over time, but analyzing for purposes of justice and/or learning from … Continue reading →

Cliché Thinking:  Basing a conclusion on a cliché. Refutation: Cliché’s are sometimes generally true, but are never always true. Example –  Adam: Betty, you know the old saying “it’s better to be safe than sorry”. Well that proves that contraceptive … Continue reading →

Contradictory Assumptions: Having the first two premises of an argument stating contradictory assertions . Refutation: By definition, contradictory claims cannot be true at the same time. One has to be wrong. Example –  Abby: Adam, I believe that each individual … Continue reading →