Art & science of reasoning. Sound, correct reasoning.

type of arguments that distract by focusing attention on the source of the argument, rather than on the issue itself.

Arguments that distract by making the audience afraid of the consequences of disagreeing with the speaker.

Arguments that claim that since a proposition cannot be disproven, it must be true or likely. Shifts burden of proof to the audience/opponent instead of it belonging to the person making the claim.

What is the issue at hand?
Relevance: is it relevant?
Presumption: is it assuming something illegitimate?
Clarity: is it clear?

providing examples or rationale reasons for or against an idea with the intent to persuade.

Arguments that attempt to avoid the issue by insulting an opponent with abusive language.

Arguments that distract by making the audience feel sorry for the speaker or someone on behalf of whom the speaker is arguing.

Arguments that distract by measuring a plan or policy according to goals it wasn't intended to achieve. Assign a different, unintended goal/function and then attack that goal or function, showing it to be flawed.

Arguments that are really distractions from the main point.

Relevance, Presumption and Clarity

Arguments that try to discredit an opponent because of his background, affiliations, or self-interest in the matter at hand.

Arguments that distract by making the audience want to be part of the crowd or one of the "common people."

Arguments that distract by making a case for the wrong point. (Arguing positively for something, but what it is arguing for is irrelevant to the issue).

Engaging in discussion and debate without personal attack, bickering or quarreling in order to discover, clarify and more fully understand what is true, correct or wise.

1 of the 3 principles of critical thinking - addressing the real, relevant issue.

Arguments that assume that a rival's recommendation should be discounted because the rival does not always follow it himself.

Arguments that distracts by making the audience want to feel special/elite.

Arguments that attempt to disprove an opponent's position by presenting it in an unfair, inaccurate light. Character assassination.

Engaging in discussion and debate while also bickering, quarreling, and personally attacking each other, with little regard for actually discovering, clarifying, and more fully understanding what is true, correct or wise.

Lover of wisdom, student of philosophy

Arguments that state that an idea should be discounted simply because of its source or origin?

Arguments that distract by attempting to shame the listener into agreement by citing an illegitimate authority figure.

An argument that abuses the burden of proof by making an opponent irrefutably prove his position rather than making a sound argument for your own position. Can be a strong case, but its arguing for the wrong thing.

Whenever someone argues for something, introduces facts, issues, testimonies, and evidence that do not truly bear on the issue at hand.