debatable and controversial statements or assertions that you hope to prove

a logical and persuasive connection between a claim and the reasons and data supporting it

appeals to values and emotions

words and phrases that place limits on claims

evidence offered to support a warrant

potential objections to an argument

generalizing on the basis of a number of specific examples

assuming a general principle and then applying that principle to a specific case

any statement that needs no definition or proof

comparison that is not true or barely true

based on a conclusion that has not yet been proven or agreed upon

two events observed as occurring at the same time, so one is therefore seen as causing the other

because one event happened after another, it must have happened because of that earlier event

speak with too few people or consider only what a few people had to say

might be based on data, but is too far-reaching and does not account for variations in data

Information, esp. of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote or publicize a particular political cause or point of view

I say that X is true. Therefore X is true. The mere fact of asserting a truth makes it true

way of de-humanizing his or her target

highlighting the facts that are most pertinent to the audience and that support the writer’s thesis is at the very definition of slant and spin

can make readers cast aside reason and arrive at an inappropriately strong conclusion

intentionally attempting to initiate the reader’s “fight or flight” response, when reason shuts off and the reader’s only concern is to protect themselves and their loved ones

first, of course, the propagandist sidesteps the validity (or invalidity) of the argument and instead compliments and cajoles the readers into accepting the thesis. Second, the propagandist insults the opposition, thus tacitly implying that the reader agrees with the argument

suggests a cause and effect relationship between the point in the argument and some-usually exaggerated-outcome. Negative outcome, appeal to fear. Positive outcome, appeal to flattery. The cause and effect relationship is either untrue or hugely exaggerated; distracts the reader from the real issue, the argument

To reduce complicated issues to simple threats or to exaggerate a possible danger well beyond its actual likelihood

Relying entirely on manipulatively heart-warming or heart-wrenching appeals to emotion to win support for what has not been otherwise rationally justified.

Suggesting that you should listen and follow what someone has to say about something that he or she is in fact not a credible, reliable authority on.

identifies the other as the cause of the problem

assuming that the “nutshell” is all there is to an issue

draws heavily on oversimplification, appeals to fear and flattery, and begging the question; reduces a complex, multi-faced issue to a simple “either…or”

the wrong conclusion is drawn

The faulty assumption that because one event follows another, the second necessarily causes the first

interprets facts and material arising from one world view in terms of another world view

Attacking the character of a person rather than engaging with the claim, reasons, and evidence she or he is setting forth

Drawing attention away from the issue at hand by focusing on an irrelevant issue as a substitute for making a case

Suggesting that simply because a lot of others are doing it, you should too

Proposing that there simply cannot be any other possible way of making sense of and engaging with an issue but the one you represent

responding to an argument that the individual never actually made, or so reconstructing his argument that it is really something else

the drawing of a logical conclusion from two statements or premises

An argument which leaves out a necessary portion in a logical sequence, seeming to suggest a logical connection when in fact one does not exist

An argument that gives a lie an honest appearance, by insisting on what is only partially or formally true

an attempt to support a statement by simply repeating the statement in different or stronger terms

To reduce complicated questions, which can be effectively answered in multiple different ways, to only two, diametrically opposed, possible answers

To greatly exaggerate the supposedly inevitable future consequences of an action by suggesting one small step will initiate a process that will necessarily lead the way to a much bigger result

Suggesting that you should listen and follow what someone has to say about something that he or she is in fact not a credible, reliable authority on

when the arguer claims that his conclusion is one of only two options, when in fact there are other possibilities. The arguer then goes on to show that the 'only other option' is clearly outrageous, and so his preferred conclusion must be embraced.

whenever a person attempts to compliment or flatter another in order to get her to accept the truth of a proposition

of a word or visual pattern not only causes it to become remembered (which is persuasive in itself), it also leads people to accept what is being repeated as being true

Arguing that all members of a group are like some other members of that group, or are responsible for what those others have done

Intensification may also be enhanced through the overall composition of what is being presented

When we divert or distract a person from something we do not want them to attend to, then we may succeed in reducing their attention to it

Another way of downplaying is simply to say nothing about the things that will counteract our arguments

used to obfuscate weaknesses in one's own position. A typical way of doing this is by showering the other person with data, or perhaps asking them complex questions about their own position