Page A3

ad hoc

[Latin] Literally "to this"  a committee, debate, or other similar function called for a specific problem as compared to regularly scheduled functions

agnostic

The meaning in general and wide modern usage is the third category of belief.  The three categories are 1) those to whom the evidence suggests there is a god, 2) those to whom the evidence suggests there is no god, and 3) those to whom the evidence suggests nothing about the existence of god.  With the brief rise in the popularity of atheism a few years ago there was an effort to conflate categories 2 and 3 in order characterize atheism as a "disbelief."  That included trying to use a meaning for agnostic that included essentially everyone.  While the term "disbelief" might especially fit the agnostic, category 3, subset of people and thus serve clarity in debates, the term is also so widely used as the opposite of belief that it becomes necessary to set forth exact definitions at the start of debates. See "atheist"

animalcule

The term was coined by the inventor of the microscope who believed he had discovered extremely simple forms of life, so simple as perhaps "molecules."  For much of the early history of microscopes it was believed that might lead to a scientific theory of spontaneous generation.  As microscope technology improved the enormous complexity life was revealed and the notion of an "animalcule" or form of life so simple as that is now discarded.  Lately, disreputable sources continue to use the term for forms of life well known to be extremely complex, that could not at all have been assembled randomly.  In fact there are no forms of life so simple as to make the term useful or meaningful.

argument from incredulity

[internet amateurs] Because incredulity does not arise in one side of a debate, rather it arises between two sides, it can't recommend which is more likely correct.  The situation is more professionally called a tu quoque which recognizes the lack of resolution possible without further evidence.  The side that imagines itself the less credulous cannot claim the win.

argument from ignorance

[From a joke once told by John Locke, not an actual formal fallacy] An inappropriate term for making note of a lack of evidence from the other side of a debate.  It should be obvious there is nothing wrong with such a practice.  It is not a fallacy in logic.  Where you provide evidence something did not happen, and the opponent believes only evidence how something did happen should be allowed to challenge, he might accuse you of arguing from ignorance.  If he believes the thief entered through the back door and you note the fact there is no back door you are not committing any false logic. You are not required to show how the thief did enter to establish where he did not.
Another reason people think an argument "without" evidence is always flawed is the incorrect assumption that it is impossible to "prove a negative."  It is easily possible as explained here.  Although the phrase "argument from ignorance" might be found in otherwise credible sources after the year 2000, it is not before. After about 2000 internet atheists made things like that up in order to "win" arguments they were obviously starting to lose.

argumentum ad baculum

[Latin] Argument by force. Literally by a staff, stick. Not used in debate in either of these senses. Antithetical to debate except in a poetic sense.

argumentum ad hominem

[Latin] Personal attacks on a speaker's abilities or character rather than a logical analysis of the ideas being put forth by that speaker.  Since very good ideas might be promoted by people who are not so good it is important to consider ideas and the people supporting them separately.  It should be obvious, but sometimes is not that there are cases where personal characteristics can be essential to the topic.
When it is important to separate a speaker from other proponents of an argument it can be necessary to point out his flaws and note that they are only his, not others' who support the same cause.  It isn't right to keep silent about his flaws and let others be assumed to have them also.

argumentum ad internetiam

[Originally for comic effect] Lately a real problem in misapplied logic caused by young people who do not understand their position thoroughly enough to carry forward their own arguments.  Before the internet people had more experience presenting their own arguments.  As a result of the ease of merely presenting internet links too many have grown up without a clear understanding of their sources and proper application of data.

argumentum ad misericordiam

[Latin] Appealing to pity. See "pathos"

argumentum ad populum

[Latin] Appealing to the people, popular, a large number of people, a majority.   Although this type of argument is properly categorized as a flaw in reasoning in science, it is not always incorrect.  Indeed in science nothing is decided by votes, but science is not capabble of solving most public issues. In public issues there is no agreemnet what the problem is. If people could agree what the problem is then science would have a chance of solving it, otherwise science is useless.  Atheists often incorrectly assume that the problems in politics exist because they are not addressed scientifically, which is absurd.

argumentum ad potentiam

[Latin]Remarkable similar to argumentum ad verecundiam&bnsp; Depending on authority or some appearance of financial or political success.  It is indirect evidence.

argumentum ad verecundiam

[Latin]Remarkable similar to argumentum ad potentiam&bnsp; Depending on some appearance of financial or political success or authority.  It is indirect evidence.

atheist

The longstanding official dictionary definition is a person who believes there is no god.  Although it is certainly a belief, it is not a systematic belief and by that point not a religion per se.  Lately attempts to use the word atheist to describe atheists and agnostics as though they are the same have been attempted.  That generally leads to confusion and constant interruption to distinguish "weak" and "strong" or "active" and "passive" forms of atheism when using the word agnostic has served clarity well for decades.  Similar confusion is encountered with the term disbelief.

bias

The predisposition or tendency to interpret things some way rather than another or believe something rather than another so as to cloud judgement.

brick and click

Having both a physical business location (brick) and an Internet presence (click). Also "click and brick."

burden of proof

Required of the challenger to the status quo [Latin].  A "resolution" has the burden of proof, the "status quo" does not.  Internet amateurs often place the burden of proof on "the person making a claim," but fail to understand the status quo.  If there is a debate on how many wheels automobiles should have, the status quo is four wheels.  A person recommending three wheels would have the burden of proof.  The status quo is not some "original" or "default" condition like one wheel or no wheels. Similarly a "god" exists currently as much as holidays do insofar as they are widely celebrated.  The question then is not existence but particulars of the definition of a god.  Since claims are heaped upon claims throughout history and any current discussions are likely to quote them the "person making the claim" is not a prctical rule for determining the burden of proof.

clinical trial

Recent usage of the term "clinical" is quite twisted away from scientific.  In science there are "clinical" and "field" studies.  The advantage of a "clinical" study is complete control over all the variables.  The advantage of a "field" study is that the organism, for example a bird, is not disturbed or influenced by captivity.  The longstanding definition of "pre-clinical" has been "before symptoms appear."  Recently the attempt to call studies on animals "pre-clinical" and on humans "clinical" trials, which has everything to do with advertising aesthetics and nothing to do with science, has taken some sway.  The FDA ought to do something about it but when Obama promised to "restore science to its rightful place" that is obviously not what he meant.  Calling studies on humans "clinical" belies the accuracy.  Humans are not put in cages and complete control over all variables is not possible.

creationism

The term used to describe a particular opposition to Darwinism.  It has been largely replaced by the term "intelligent design." It is mistakenly believed that the change of term was to avoid the appearance of "religion" and so allow public schools to teach it. Courts have ruled that religion disqualifies something for public schools; however, they were incorrect.  That would be an ad hominem argument.  Moreover the real reason for the change was that the term "creationism" was favored by people who expected a literal interpretation of the Bible, which the Bible itself does not require.  In the early days of "animalcules" the only opposition to Darwinism was from people who believed the Bible must be taken literally on the matter of "creation."  Modern opposition to Darwinism is not based on a literal interpretation of the Bible.  It is based on science after 1933.  Early "creationism" failed to recognize numerous things widely accepted as eternal such as the ratio of the masses of the proton and electron.  The "big bang" theory is more "creationist" in that regard.

cultural inversion

[Staywell, 2005] Caused by the industrial revolution and the railroads, the "haves" moved to the country and the cities filled with "have-nots," the inverse of the prior situation.  See the article here.  In the 1980s some writers used the term to refer to a phenomenon whereby oppressed people tend to reject the culture dominating them.  People who have intelligence and are otherwise diligent might not be measured accurately by a system which fails to take into account their justifiable reluctance to adapt to a dominating culture.  That "cultural inversion" might be included in the wider problem of "disenfranchisement," which has several different causes.  Some sciences such as mathematics and physics have quite longer been considered instrumental in isolating cultural and other disenfranchising factors in learning.

de facto

[Latin] Existing but not officially or legally established.  Used here. Compare "de jure"

de jure

[Latin] Legally established. Used here. Compare "de facto."

disbelief

To "disbelieve" something is to believe its opposite, just as to "disprove" something is to prove its opposite.  Proving means removing all significant doubt.  Believing means making a decision without the necessity of proof.  Proving and disproving are both the removal of all significant doubt, and in that regard are identical.  Believing and disbelieving are both decisions made without the necessity of proof, and in that regard are identical.  The relative strengths of the evidence cannot be determined by the choice of term since each believer and disbeliever considers theirs the stronger evidence.  The correct definition of an atheist is a person who believes there is no god.  Recent attempts to rephrase it as a "disbelief" have been under the mistaken impression that the evidence against the existence of god is stronger, it is not, and that rephrasing could make the point it is stronger, it does not.  The use of "disbelief" as a synonym for "skepticism" is not necessary.  If you mean skepticism have the honesty to use the word.  People who believe things are as entitled to claim skepticism as people who disbelieve them.  Belief and disbelief are decisions, skepticism is the reluctance to make either decision. See "agnostic."  Another ruse of atheists is to claim theirs is a "lack" of belief, however it makes no sense for anyone who "lacks" belief to join either side of the relevant debate.   When they do join debates it shows they have beliefs.  Some assume their beliefs are privileged or "default," however they are neither privileged nor default.

discrimination

The term "discrimination" refers to "discernment" and as such is a poor choice of a word intended to have a negative connotation.  Perhaps it would be better to use "segregation" and "desegregation" as explained in the article here.

emergency searches

[Law] When there is an immediate and overriding need such as public safety, likely escape of a dangerous suspect or impending destruction of evidence, legal searches can be conducted without a warrant.  See Warden v. Hayden 1967, Mincey v. Arizona 1978 and Maryland v. Buie 1990.  That the emergency justified the search must hold up later in court or the evidence becomes inadmissible under the exclusionary rule.

ethos

[Greek] In debate, appealing to or on behalf of an established system of, for example, ethics, morals, law or politics.  See the three appeals

exclusionary rule

[Law] When a search is conducted without legal requirement any evidence obtained may not be used in court.  See Weeks v. U.S. 1914, Mapp v. Ohio 1961.  Further evidence obtained solely from inadmissible evidence is also inadmissible.  See Silverthorne Lumber Co. v. U.S. 1920

externalities

[Economics] A transaction involves a buyer and a seller and often has little or no measurable effect on other parties.  Some transactions have clear advantages or disadvantages to other parties such as when the buyer of alcohol and a third party have an accident, a negative externality to the transaction if the alcohol is a cause, or when the buyer of a vaccine prevents others' illness beside his own.  The prevention is a positve externality.  Positive externalities make the optimum price lower, negative externalities higher, than the equilibrium price of the buyer and seller.

falsifiable

[See Karl Popper] The idea that in order for a claim to be "science" a scenario must be possible to prove it wrong.  It is similar to argument from ignorance in that it holds that an "absence" of evidence cannot be a proof, or that it is "impossible to prove a negative."  It is not whether a proof is negative that makes it "impossible," it is the scope of the proof.  If the scope of the proof is infinite it might never be proved, but negatives with finite scope are readily provable, for example "the baseball is not in the toolbox" is readily provable. For more on proving negatives see Can Anyone Prove a Negative?.

five second rule

From the notion that food dropped on the ground remains safe to eat if retrieved within five seconds.  A much better rule is the "natural barrier" rule whereby food dropped on the ground remains safe to eat if the only portion in contact with the ground is a barrier designed by nature to block out infection such as the outer covering or "skin" of most fruits and vegetables.  If retrieved the barrier needs to be rinsed as it ordinarily is and avoiding contact with the rest of the food.  If the food lands on the ground with a cut away inner portion in contact with the ground it is probably best to discard it.

flat tax

1 A tax which is for all people the same percentage of income.
2 A tax which does not redistribute wealth between levels.
3 A tax which is for all people the same amount.
4 A tax system which does not restrain unfair practices per se, in itself.

freedom

No simple concept really, it is much more than "unobstructed."  The staff at the Town Voice for Science, Poetry, Politics and Religion would remind you that the word "freedom" has political and religious roots that can have markedly different qualities that are quite difficult to describe.  The religious concept of "freedom" is concerned with the soul and ways to keep it free from excessive debts and entanglements to the material world and does not oppose responsibility or responsible government.  Witness Hinduism.  The political meaning of the word has become rather mired in materialism and the "rights" of individuals to entangle themselves as their passions drive them and in ways often seen as irresponsible.  Although war is always a dissembler of government, the "freedom" that results might be spiritual or material depending on the types of governments dissembled and later forming.  A country with massive debt is not likely "free" nor is one that exceeds the limits of its environment.

gender

With the recent recognition and acceptance of more varied personal preferences it becomes necessary to develop more precise terms.  In addition to "grammatical" gender that applies only to words there can be a need for a term for gender as determined by biological facts and a different term for "gender" as determined by fantasy.  The law and the public, especially strangers can be disinterested in any fantasy gender, and might even try to ignore it.  When noting gender on document forms it is recommended to use biological gender rather than fantasy gender unless otherwise requested.  In some circumstances there might even be legal consequences for misrepresenting biological gender. In most public toilets it might never be necessary to reveal either biological or fantasy gender because of private, safely latchable stalls.  When showering without individual privacy it is recommended to use facilities designed for biological gender.  That might also be legally required.

insanity

Highly scholarly and authoritative texts still exist that define homosexuality as a mental disorder.

inventor

An early developer of something with a remarkable contribution to its design or use.

law

[Science] In science, not politics, a "law" differs from a theory in that a law predicts all occurrences of phenomena in certain conditions.  Theories are different explanations that do not predict or explain the entirety of the phenomena.  Germ theory is one of many explanations of disease and it remains tangled with other theories.  Capitalism and socialism are competing economic theories.  It is the "law" of supply and demand.  Exceptions to laws do not cancel them if the reason for the exception is clear.  The gas laws do not hold exactly when the distance between the molecules approaches zero.  Yet they are still the gas "laws" because they do hold for the certain conditions where the distance between the molecules does not approach zero.  Gravity remains a "law" because a formula can be used to predict without fail how it will work.  The formula might be Newton's or it might be Einstein's, whichever, there is only one formula.  Deciding which can be problematic because the difference in any practical measurement is too small to register on most instrumentation.  Missions to the moon provided an excellent opportunity to settle the question.  Those results have not been forthcoming.

living room war

The Vietnam Conflict (a "war" undeclared by the United States despite its massive involvement) was the first to have nearly live vivid video coverage.  Because it was seen in living rooms across America, it is sometimes called "the living room war."

logos

[Greek] In debate, appealing to reason, a sense of logic.  See the three appeals

mango

A "controversy" among friends has appeared.  Is the mango a giant peach?  The flavor of the mango is similar to the peach and it has a pit somewhat like the peach.  That being as it may, the scientific classification seems to indicate a more distant relationship.  And that being as it may, the "scientific" classification of things has a long history of confusing phylogeny and morphology and having other inaccuracies, inexpediencies and needs to be changed.  So we have to decided to call upon Michael Savage and his knowledge of medical botany to disport on this issue.  We have not received an answer yet.  Watch how this goes.

no true Scotsman

[From a joke, not an actual logical fallacy] An issue of definition of terms only.  Because definitions are arbitrary they must be agreed upon before a debate, not during.  Often some specific edition of some dictionary is used for most terms, but debates also address developments not covered in dictionaries and must add "working definitions" of the terms needed.  Although the definition of a "Scotsman" should not be controversial since citizenship is legally defined, controversy can develop.  Furthermore usually when a "logical fallacy" is called it is with much less availble definition.  The definitions of "Christians" and "Buddhists" can be very controversial and definitions need to be agreed upon before the debate.  Having a particular definition is not a logical fallacy.

nonrenewable energy sources

Crude oil, its derivatives, also natural gas, nuclear fuels and other energy sources that cannot be replaced at any significant level once used. 

non sequitur

[Latin] "it does not follow."  It is drawing a conclusion that does not logically follow.  It logically follows that if it rains the ground will get wet.  It does not follow that the houses will turn red.  That "the houses will turn red" is a non sequitur.

pathos

Greek for suffering. In debate, appealing to pity.  See the three appeals

Pax Romana

[Latin] A time of relative peace achieved by uniting the "known world" under one government.  It is translated from Latin as "the roman peace," but the term is often loosely applied to other similar times in the past and to hopes for the future.  Now an organization of governments is assumed necessary rather than one government.

petitio principii

[Latin] Conclusion contained in the premise.

post hoc, ergo propter hoc

[Latin] Often incorrect assumption that because one event follows another in time, the first event must be the cause of the second.

prima facie

[Latin] At first sight.  On the surface, face.

question

The topic or resolution of the debate.  See resolution.

reductio ad absurdam

[Latin] A contradiction can be drawn from the argument.  See "Democrat" (Not really, just joking.)

resolution

In debate, the topic or question.  The question is put in the form of a resolution by the affirmative team.  The question, "Should project 'A' be built?," becomes, "Be it resolved that project 'A' be built."  In the U.N. positions are also called "resolutions."  There is some affinity to the meaning in debate.

spiritualism

Many words with a variety of meanings are based on the root word "spirit."  When used with the ending "ism" it has a more specific meaning.  "Spiritualism" is the term for communication with dead, for example by "mediums."  Adding "s" is the correct plural spelling of "medium" to refer to people who communicate with the dead.  The other plural, "media," is used to refer to general public communications; movies, books, television, newspares and recently the internet.  

status quo

[Latin] The state of things as they are.  A "resolution" has the burden of proof, the "status quo" does not.  Internet amateurs often place the burden of proof on "the person making a claim," but fail to understand the status quo.  If there is a debate on how many wheels automobiles should have, the status quo is four wheels.  A person recommending three wheels would have the burden of proof.  The status quo is not some "original" or "default" condition like one wheel or no wheels. Similarly a "god" exists currently as much as holidays do insofar as they are widely celebrated.  The question then is not existence but particulars of the definition of a god.

strawman

In debate some will try to argue against ideas no one really defends.  They are said to be debating the "strawman" or imaginary person holding those ideas.  While it is good practice to attempt to predict before a debate what an oppponent will say, the term is not ordinarily used in that way.  It is usually used disparagingly when debaters incorrectly attribute things to opponents during debates.  This is different from, and should not be confused with, a "scarecrow."

theory

Many attempts have been made to use the word "theory" in senses different from the strict scientific definition.  Especially people who know that evolution is a "theory" want that to mean more than it does in science, so they concoct all sorts of definitions aimed at comparing evolution to a scientific "law" or better.  See law.

three appeals

Public speakers have three appeals; ethos, logos, pathos.

topic

The question or resolution being debated.

trinity

See the article here.

tu quoque

[Latin] Literally "you also." Example, "My opponent uses negative ads."  Appropriate response to a double standard.

unresolved internal conflict

Working against oneself.  A definition of insanity.  In debate, saying diametrically opposed things without resolving them, an automatic forfeiture of the debate.  I warned you of this problem July 10, 2008.  I have understood the problem and been careful about clear resolution all my very long and illustrious debating career.

---

The Town Voice Home

This is the state capitol building of Virginia from the front (right photo) and the back (lower left photo). The central portion has been in use since 1788. The east and west wings were added in 1906. A major renovation was completed in 2007.
	Since the renovation there are no air conditioners in the windows as the back view shows. Photos by Arlon Staywell.