I have seen these in the magazines
** Argument Ad Hominem: attacks person, not issue
I have seen this here on the board too .... when some don't have anything to say they attack the person rather than give a good answer.
** Hasty Generalization: bases conclusion on small amount of evidence
The Society does this all the time
** Red Herring: pulls discussion away from issue at hand by introducing new focus
I didn't realize I was doing this until someone showed me .... it is part of 'theocratic strategy'
** Tu Quoque (You Also): proposes that the member of the opposition
does not practice what he/she preaches, so the argument must be
invalid
Example: some people get drunk at Christmas which means that christmas must be bad just like we said.
** Appeal to Doubtful Authority: uses a celebrity or non-expert
as an authority
We only have to look at the Trinity brochure to see that ....
Rather than a personal attack on the individual, the speaker indicts the entire group to which the individual belongs, as a distraction from the opponent's argument.
And example of tis is some Catholics do the wrong thing which means that everything they teach must be wrong and evil ....
Thankyou for posting this Jan. I am going to print it out and pass it around.....