nyuuzyou/wikis huggingface dataset:
Argumentum ad hominem (français)

L'expression latine Argumentum ad hominem ou simplement Ad hominem (signifiant à la personne) désigne un argument portant sur le messager plus que sur son message. Parfois on utilisera cette expression pour tout argument faisant appel aux émotions, en particulier celles n'ayant rien à voir avec le message. L'Ad hominem est un cas particulier de non sequitur, car quand bien même l'argument sur le messager serait vrai, il n'est pas possible d'en déduire logiquement la conclusion attendue.
==Forme==
Un Ad hominem présente cette forme:
A soutient que B
or A est C (donc on peut douter de A)
donc B faux
==Usage implicite==
Il est possible de recourrir à l'Ad hominem de manière plus subtile en ne mentionnant pas la conclusion, en mentionnant des choses "amorales" dans le passé du messager sans les lier explicitement avec ce qu'il dit. 
==Reductio ad Hitlerum==
le Reductio ad Hitlerum est un cas particulier d'Ad hominem de la forme suivante:
A soutient B
Hitler a soutenu B
Or Hitler est mauvais
donc B faux
==Exemples==
N'écoutons pas plus longtemps ce que dit un criminel.
Il a tort. Pourquoi? c'est un communiste.
==Voir aussi==
===Versions en autres langues===
گزاره‌ی حمله‌ی شخصی in Farsi
Category:Français
Category:Ad hominem
Category:Logique
Argumentum ad hysteria

The appeal to hysteria, or argumentum ad hysteria, is the (informal) fallacy of painting one's opponent as mentally ill in order to discredit their argument. It is a variant of the ad hominem fallacy which is a fallacy of irrelevant premise. It is fallacious because one's mental status, regardless if one is mentally ill or not, does not entail that one's argument is invalid, or one's statements/beliefs are false.
This is distinct from the clinical context of labeling a delusional belief as delusional with sufficient ethical grounds. It is an appeal to hysteria fallacy which takes it that because someone is mentally ill (whether one actually is or not) then whatever one says must therefore be false or unreasonable.
==Form==
An argumentum ad hysteria argument has the basic form:
==Examples==
*"Your argument for the legitimacy of your gender identity is invalid because you have a mental disorder that is gender dysphoria."'Being Transgender is a Mental Illness': What Does the DSM Really Say?" — Gender Analysis with Zinnia Jones
*"Your argument about discrimination against the disabled is invalid because you're a diagnosed How can we be certain you're not just being paranoid?"
*Drapetomania — or the idea that there's something medically wrong with black people not wanting to be human livestock.
*"There’s nothing wrong with the Soviet Union, comrade! You only think that because you’re suffering from "
*"Why should I accept anything said from an insane homosexual?" from when homosexuality was considered a mental disorder
*"The government isn’t spying on us. You’re just paranoid!"
*Dismissing women's complaints as female hysteria
*Adrian Schoolcraft
*Gustl Ferdinand Mollath
*"These 30 'crazy' people have been proven RIGHT by history.""30 crazy historical figures who were RIGHT"
==See also==
*Ableism
*Gaslighting
*Pathos gambit
==References==
Category:Ableism
Category:Informal fallacies
Category:Latin phrases
Argumentum ad lunam

Argumentum ad lunam (also appeal to the Moonhttps://web.archive.org/web/20100110094513/http://www.sinclair.edu/centers/wc/LogicalFallacy/index.cfm) is the argument that, "if we can put a man on the Moon", we must also be able to X (usually something really important).
The argument is almost always an informal fallacy and a false analogy.
==Form==
Bo Bennett raises the following examples:Appeal to the Moon, Logically Fallacious
While C1 might be stated differently (if it is stated), its ludicrosity is obvious. Just because you can do one thing, does not mean you can do another (usually) unrelated thing.
There is one (mostly) non-fallacious form of the fallacy:
P2 here seems much stronger — usually, people can do things in repetition. In this case, however, such an illusion falls away with a glance at NASA's budget.
==External links==
*xkcd's take
==References==
Category:Informal fallacies
Category:Latin phrases
Category:Moon
Argumentum ad martyrdom

Argumentum ad martyrdom is a pseudo-Latin term used for two different logical fallacies commonly favored by cranks and Christian fundamentalists:
* That a belief becomes true if the person asserting it is hated for it.
* That martyrdom is evidence of the truth of a proposition as martyrs would not die for nothing.
==Galileo gambit variation==
This version typically stems from a belief that the message being conveyed makes people hostile because of its truth. This usage was initially coined by "Tinker Grey", a secular member of Christian ForumsChristian Forums who saw that refuting an argument of a member who was under the impression that other members hated them resulted in a bolstering of their confidence in their refuted argument.
The argument is reportedly popular with Christians as the Bible says to expect persecution for your beliefs and that persecution indicates you are right (e.g., ):
(And lots more.All That Will Live Godly in Christ Jesus Shall Suffer Persecution ''
Topical Bible Studies (archived from May 23, 2019).)
==Personal certainty==
This usage is the argument that Christianity (or, for that matter, IslamDying for God: Martyrdom in the Shii and Babi Religions by Jonah Winters (1997) Master of Arts thesis, University of Toronto via Bahá'í Library (archived from May 22, 2019). or whatever) is true because people would not martyr themselves for it if it were false, sometimes presented in the rhymed statement that martyrs wouldn't "die for a lie". Thus, the martyrs' assumed personal certainty is advanced as evidence for a proposition. 
This usage precedes the "Galileo gambit" usage, and in Christianity, it goes back to the 2nd/3rd century Church father who claimed that "the blood of the martyrs is seed", i.e., that the examples of martyrs dying for the Christian faith would convince others that Christians must be on to something that good.Tertullian, Apologeticus, ch. 50. Tertullian also spawned the branch of history known as Christian Rediscovering the Martyrology by George Weigel (2.26.14) First Things.
Argument from personal certainty is trivially false: throughout history, many people have died in the service of provable lies. More generally, if you consider the number of people who died for mutually contradictory ideas (e.g., from different religions or over doctrinal disputes), it is likely that most people who died for an idea were actually wrong. As this is a common argument, detailed refutations have been compiled.Would someone die for what they knew was a lie? Religions Wiki.
==See also==
*Arthur C. Clarke's First Law
*Big science
*Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed
*Confirmation bias
*Galileo gambit
*Hostile media effect
*Paranoia
*Persecution complex
*Science was wrong before
==Notes==
==References==
Category:Informal fallacies
Category:Pseudo-Latin phrases
Argumentum ad nauseam

An argumentum ad nauseam (also known as an argument by repetition) is the logical fallacy that something becomes true if it is repeated often enough. It is a subset of argument by assertion and is an informal fallacy. An ad nauseam argument that can be easily shown to be false leads to the "point refuted a thousand times".
Due to the modern 24 hour cable news cycle and the fact that every idiot now has a blog, argumentum ad nauseam has become particularly prevalent. In politics it is usually used in the form of a talking point, which is then reduced to a three second sound bite and is repeated at every available opportunity. On the blogosphere it takes the form of a meme, where every like-minded blogger repeats a statement used by a fellow blogger. Twitter, where every message has to be less than 280 (and until recently just 140) characters, has only made this latter form of viral propaganda worse.
Repeating an opinion again and again seems to convince people that it is true, in large part because it simulates the effect of an appeal to the people (argumentum ad populum). Moreover, by assuming what needs proof, it is circular, and therefore amounts
to begging the question (petitio principii). However, that does not apply to arguments such as "Hydrogen and oxygen molecules
combine in a 2:1 ratio to create water; therefore, if you combine hydrogen and oxygen in proper proportion, water will result."
Like redundancy, repetition is not inherently evil, nor does it constitute a logical fallacy (flawed reasoning) all by itself.
If it were, every parent would be guilty of it, as would every teacher, every drill sergeant, and every conductor or director.
It is also important to distinguish between opinions and arguments. By definition, an argument is a set of premises in support
of a conclusion, whereas an opinion is merely a thought or a belief, whether it has or lacks any evidence to justify or support
it. Accusing someone of committing a fallacy is not the same as proving it. Indeed, some of the examples cited here fall far
short of the mark. Beware of bearing false witness, and of using the weapons of logic indiscriminately, lest they backfire on
those who wield them. Beware of name-calling ("any idiot with a blog"), which is itself an ad hominem. And beware of thyself.
Let one whose reasoning is flawless invent the first dismissive label. Or as the French say, honi soit qui mal y pense.
==Examples==
==Parodies==
==See also==
*PRATT
*Argument by assertion
*Big lie
*Circular reasoning
*Philip J. Rayment
*Fun:Creationist argument Bingo
*Gish Gallop
*Infinite regress
*Thought-terminating cliché
===Want to read this in another language?===
==External links==
*
*Flaws in Reasoning and Arguments: Repetition
==Notes==
Category:Fallacious arguments
Category:Latin phrases
Category:Informal fallacies
Argumentum ad nauseam (français)

La locution latine Argumentum ad nauseam ou simplement Ad nauseam désigne le paralogisme affirmant qu'une idée suffisament répété devient vraie. Les journaux télévisés journaliers et les blogs ont beaucoup développé ce paralogisme. Sur les blogs il prend la forme d'un mème. Le développement viral de ces messages est également important sur twitter.
Poussé à l'extrême, ça devient du lavage de cerveau.
==Exemples==
*Tous les dictons
*
*
*
*
*
==Voir aussi==
===Versions en autres langues===
Category:Français
Category:Logique
Argumentum ad sarcina inserta

Argumentum ad sarcina inserta is a fallacious anti-vaccination argument that holds that the contents of the warnings on package inserts of vaccines and diagnostic tests indicates that the vaccine is very dangerous or that the diagnostic test has a high failure rate.
These arguments fail to take into account the actual measured rates of adverse reactions or actual measured false positive rates, or to take into account the proven beneficial effect of vaccination.
If you're curious, The CDC has is an official list of all known vaccine ingredients.Vaccine Excipient Summary: Excipients Included in U.S. Vaccines, by Vaccine (January 2019) Centers for Disease Control.
==Basic format==
The above argument, which is what most anti-med cranks default to, conveniently ignores the idea that certain qualities of an element can be cancelled out by another element. This is why sodium chloride (table salt) is safe to ingest, while chlorine gas is not. Importantly, the argument also ignores the fact that virtually everything is poisonous at some dose level (the dose makes the poison), so yes people have died from ingesting too much salt,Sodium: Too Much of a Good Thing: The Dangers of Sodium Poisoning National Capital Poison Center. but not at anywhere near the levels that occur in vaccines.
Another common argument can be:
This argument also conveniently ignores the fact that doctors do read package inserts, as some patients may be allergic to certain ingredients within the medicine.
==Examples==
*The package insert on the HIV test says that the test can give false positives if you are also taking a pregnancy test. Therefore the HIV test is useless.
*My doctor told me to take (insert prescription medicine here), but he hasn't even read the package insert for the medicine. Therefore, he is a shill for Big Pharma.
==See also==
*HIV denial
*Jenny McCarthy
==References==
Category:Anti-vaccination movement
Category:Fallacious arguments
Category:Informal fallacies
Category:Logic
Category:Pseudo-Latin phrases
ru:Argumentum Package Insertium
Arianism

Arianism is a view of the Trinity where Jesus is a created being, rather than being one with God; it is not to be confused with Aryanism and has nothing to do with Nazis, except those poor at spelling. It is named for Arius, a Christian presbyter from Alexandria, Egypt who lived from c. 250 AD to 336.
Arianism was widely adopted among some Germanic tribes, but it went extinct following infighting among Christians as the Western Roman Empire fell apart. There was a conflict centering over the letter "i" in the Greek word "homoios".
==Arian Christology==
Arianism considers Jesus distinct from God the Father, having been created by him, but nonetheless describes him as Lord or Master, while denying that he can know the Father fully. The Arian viewpoint on the Holy Spirit is that it is a "sanctifying power," subordinate even to the Son. They point to such scriptures as and in support of their claim that Jesus is distinct from the Father, and and in support of their claim that he was created by God.
They contrast with the mainstream Christian belief that the Father and Son are "homoousion", i.e. of the same substance (from the Greek for same substance or essence), as used in the Nicene Creed. Arians held various opinions on what Jesus was made of: homoiousians believed that the two were of similar but not identical substance; homoeans believed they were similar but not of the same substance or essence; and heteroousians held that they were different in substance or attributes. The last included anomoeanism, the belief that Jesus's nature was neither the same nor similar to God's, a belief held by Aëtius "the atheist" of Antioch and others.
It's not clear what difference this made in practice, but there's very little idea of what Arians believed. The theoretical questions were things like, did Jesus always exist or did he appear/get created at some point (the latter is Arian); and was Jesus equal to God (because made of the same stuff) or subordinate. None of this impinges on actual moral or ethical questions.
==History==
Arianism is very fourth-century, and the Council of Nicaea (325 CE) threw it out as a belief-system.http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf214.vii.iii.html Arius himself was exonerated in 335, and his teachings enjoyed the support of the next two emperors. Finally, the First Council of Constantinople in 381 anathematised Arius again (posthumously).http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf214.ix.viii.i.html Despite all the Orthodox condemnation floating about, Arian teachings have resurfaced occasionally since then, including among Germanic tribes (notably the Goths) in the early Medieval period, and recently in the Yorkshire-based Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church of Arian Catholicism.
Complete with green ink!
Jehovah's Witnesses, though sometimes characterised as modern-day Arians, only describe the Son as having been created by the Father - they do not share the remainder of Arius's beliefs. Mormonism can also count as Arian, as it views Yahweh and Jesus as distinct entities.
==See also==
*Trinity
*Christology
*Isaac Newton — a latter-day Arian
==References==
Category:Christian denominations
Ariel Toaff

Ariel Toaff is a notorious Israeli rabbi and university professor of Judeo-Italian descent who is accused of being an antisemitic crank. His father was Chief Rabbi of Rome. He is author of the pseudohistorical book Pasque di sangue. Ebrei d'Europa e omicidi rituali (Passovers of Blood: The Jews of Europe and Ritual Murders), which claims that the myth that Jews drink the blood of Christian babies is based on some true instances.Bar-Ilan Professor Who Claimed Jews Used Christian Blood in Passover Ceremonies Defends His Book: 'I Will Fight for My Truth, Even if I Am Crucified' haaretz.com, 12 February 2007.
Noted Jewish community leader Abraham Foxman condemned Toaff's work, saying "It is incredible that anyone ... would give legitimacy to the baseless blood libel accusation that has been the source of much suffering and attacks against Jews historically."Professor's Claim Of Truth To 'Blood Libel' Plays Into Hands Of Anti-Semites. Archived from the original at the Anti-Defamation League, 8 February 2007.
==References==
Category:Antisemites
Category:Authors
Category:Living people
Category:Pseudohistory promoters
Category:Racists
Category:Jews
Category:Internalized discrimination
Arlene Foster

Arlene Foster is the former leader of the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) of Northern Ireland, a party famed for being full of Young Earth creationists, homophobes, and anti-abortionists (while they are of course major advocates for the death penalty). She served as the First Minister of Northern Ireland from 2016-2017 and 2020-2021,https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-56910045 but along the way managed to lose about £500m which caused the assembly to collapse.
==Generic zealous insanity==
She is a standard bearer of the DUP, being vehemently anti-gay, anti-abortion and an overall despot (but her party are for small government, naturally). She was previously a member of the Ulster Unionist Party prior to becoming a DUP member, the UUP are centre-right and overall much more sane than their unionist opponent. While a member of the UUP, she opposed then leader as party leader for his advocacy of the Belfast Agreement (because she's disgusted by equality).
==Leadership==
After Peter Robinson retired in 2015, Foster assumed his role as the leader of the DUP and First Minister of Northern Ireland. Many people were hoping the new leader of the far-right party would be more sane in comparison to her two predecessors (but no, the vicious sectarianism, homophobia and theocratic insanity would still prevail). In October 2016, she announced that her party would use the petition of concern to block gay marriage, despite the majority of Northern Ireland being in favor of gay marriage, because the Democratic Unionist Party are only democratic when it lines up with their agenda.
In January 2017, the Assembly collapsed because Foster (while serving as Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment) managed to fuck things up so badly that she cost the Assembly £500m thanks to a badly-constructed subsidy scheme for renewable heating which meant farmers could profit by building a barn and leaving it empty, heating it, and claiming back subsidies that were greater than their total costs. This led to a snap election in March 2017, in which the DUP lost ten seats and left them unable to solely use the petition of concern to block policies they find do not line up with their fundamentalist Christian values (as it requires 30 signatures). Foster still kept her job.
She was finally ditched by her party in 2021, when 22 of the 27 DUP Assembly members (MLAs) and 4 Westminster MPs signed a letter of no confidence. This was a consequence of her many failures: a Brexit settlement that put a trade border between Northern Ireland and the British mainland; the fact that she had abstained in a vote to ban gay conversion therapy while most of her party voted to keep gay conversion therapy legal; and a sense among DUP members that she wasn't socially conservative enough and failed to act on their petty grievances sufficiency.Arlene Foster announces resignation as DUP leader and NI first minister, BBC News, 29 April 2021Arlene Foster: Why did the DUP move against its leader?, BBC News, 29 April 2021
==References==
Category:Living people
Category:Fundamentalists
Category:Homophobes
Category:Anti-LGBT bigots
Armageddon

In Christian mythology, Armageddon is the term for the final battle between the forces of God and Satan. Different Christian denominations teach variously on what exactly would happen then. 
==Biblical use==
The name specifically refers to the place at which the final eschatological battle would take place, the Hill of Megiddo (הר מגידו, har megiddo). Several Old Testament battles allegedly took place around Megiddo. Some Christians believe that a literal battle will take place at or near Megiddo while others see the relevant text as metaphorical.;
Armageddon is more commonly (but slightly incorrectly) used as a Biblical term for the actual battle/event between the forces of God and Satan. Rare planetary alignments may indicate the start of events leading up to Armageddon, notably the rise of Antichrist.http://www.countdown.org/faq/
==Common use==
Figuratively, any battle that would bring about the end of the world can be considered an "Armageddon". With the advent of nuclear weapons and the threat of nuclear war, this has become a real possibility, one that keeps many defense analysts awake during the night and well-paid during the day. It is sometimes used for natural causes of the end of the world, such as in...
==Movie==
Armageddon is also the name of a 1998 sci-fi action film by Michael Bay, which details a fictional account of a potential asteroid impact.IMDb: Armageddon (1998) It is so notorious for its utter defilement of science that NASA uses it in their management training program, challenging staff to see how many inaccuracies they can spot. And by "inaccuracies", we're not just talking about things that are unlikely to happen in real life — we mean stuff that's downright impossible. In the words of Phil Plait, "Armageddon got some astronomy right. For example, there is an asteroid in the movie, and asteroids do indeed exist. And then there was... um... well, you know... um. Okay, so that was about all they got right."Bad Astronomy: "The Astronomy of Armageddon"
==See also==
*Last Judgement
*RationalWiki's Guide to Revelation (the book where John the Apostle John the Baptist John the Fisherman "John" gets a really bad trip). See also the annotated version.
*Millennialism
*Predictions of the end of the world (a list)
*Ragnarok
*2012 apocalypse
*Rapture
==References==
Category:Bible
Category:Christian mythology
Category:End of the world
Army of God

Army of God (AOG) is a Christian anti-abortion terrorist organization that sanctions the use of force to combat abortion in the United States. HBO produced a documentary on the Army Of God entitled Soldiers In The Army Of God. Clayton Waagner's fake anthrax letters have resulted in their being mentioned among terrorist organizations at the FBI.History of War
The earliest documented incidence of the Army of God being involved with anti-abortion activity occurred in 1982, when three men associated with the organization held an abortion doctor and his wife hostage. The hostages were later released unharmed.Anti-Abortion Extremism
AOG supports the Second Defensive Action Statement, as produced by the Defenders of the Defenders of Life, which reads:THE SECOND DEFENSIVE ACTION STATEMENT REGARDING PAUL HILL. Army of God. Retrieved August 14, 2020.
Hill was head of a precursor organization called Defensive Action, which issued signed statements to members of Congress in the early 1990s expressing similar sentiments about "killing the killers".The Army of God promoted the annual White Rose Banquet in Washington D.C. for supporters of the Defensive Action Statement from 1991 through at least 2003.
On another note, their first Defensive Action Statement is written in Comic Sans, which honestly speaks for itself.DEFENSIVE ACTION STATEMENT. Army of God. Retrieved August 14, 2020.
==External links==
*Official website (Note this has some distasteful images of aborted fetuses; also follows Haig's Law by being formatted like an old 90's site)
==References==
Category:Anti-abortion activists
Category:Fundamentalist Christian organizations
Category:Terrorist organisations