Someone who does not know how to use the term strongman argument right when a straw man argument is supposed to be someone pretending to answer with facts but really not answering the question at all
Example a Pinocchio's argument is where one who is listing facts gets told by the other person that's a straw man argument even though facts were presented and a straw man argument cannot exist when there's facts presented because I true straw man argument is it's bad because it's bad with no facts given. However someone using the Pinocchio's argument is just ignoring the facts and pretending there is a straw man argument when it doesn't fit the criteria for a straw man argument. In other words the pretending and lying and misusing it just to win an argument because in their eyes it's not about whether the right or wrong it's just whether they win. Hence the Pinocchio's argument
by Meganfan1987 May 9, 2023
The cosmological argument is the notion that God created the universe and that there is always a cause and an effect. The three main parts to the cosmological argument is the uncaused cause, unmoved mover and possibility and necessity/possibility and contingency. There are 5 ways in Aquinas's version of the cosmological argument, however I'm only discussing the 3 that I stated as they are the main parts of the argument as urban dictionary only let's me type a limited quantity of characters.
Uncaused cause (4 premises and a conclusion)
• Everything has a cause
•Every cause has a cause
• This cannot go back forever
•Therefore there must be an uncaused cause which doesn't have a cause.
•The uncaused cause is what we understand as God
Unmoved mover (2 premises and a conclusion)
•Everything that has been moved by something and that mover has been moved by something else.
•This chain cannot go back forever or movement would not have started in the first place.
•Therefore there must be an unmoved mover which isn't itself moved. This unmoved mover must be God
Possibility and necessity/possibility and contingency:
This one is simple. A contingent being is a being which needs a cause and a necessary being is the opposite meaning a being doesn't need a cause. It is believed that God is the necessary being who created the world.
Uncaused cause (4 premises and a conclusion)
• Everything has a cause
•Every cause has a cause
• This cannot go back forever
•Therefore there must be an uncaused cause which doesn't have a cause.
•The uncaused cause is what we understand as God
Unmoved mover (2 premises and a conclusion)
•Everything that has been moved by something and that mover has been moved by something else.
•This chain cannot go back forever or movement would not have started in the first place.
•Therefore there must be an unmoved mover which isn't itself moved. This unmoved mover must be God
Possibility and necessity/possibility and contingency:
This one is simple. A contingent being is a being which needs a cause and a necessary being is the opposite meaning a being doesn't need a cause. It is believed that God is the necessary being who created the world.
Now that you know the fundamentals of the cosmological argument, read up the teleological argument (the argument from design)
by Rotten Turkey July 20, 2021
by r0ut3r March 11, 2021
An argument in which a person with an absurdly high IQ taunts another person, whose IQ is slightly (but significantly) lower, until the latter person cracks and storms out in a fit of anger (usually takes all of 30 seconds)
Fiona: Man, did you see Jono storm out of here before?
Hannah: Yeah, don't worry about that, we just had a Jono Argument
Hannah: Yeah, don't worry about that, we just had a Jono Argument
by hbenns November 28, 2014
When two people you are friends with get into an argument with each other, and they both want you to believe their side of the story.
Hey, Dave and Kate broke up. Yeah, they both messaged me about it and I don’t know who to believe. I’m in a bit of an Argument Sandwich right now man.
by EliasCoyote May 4, 2024
Typically misogynistic arguments used to push the onus on the one in question to deny them rights . Used to commonly conflate responsibility with rights provided serving as a red herring .
You shouldn't appeal to close your legs arguments such as telling a man to get a vasectomy or practice abstinence if he doesnt want to pay child support as if the right to decline child support has any bearing on whether he's responsible or not .
by Euthyphrodilemma July 24, 2022
A: I'm telling you, there are aliens in Area 51, it's no conspiracy theory.
B: No, the conspiracy theory is a conspiracy theory, it's what they want you to think.
A: You are just using the Conspiracy-Loop Argument.
B: No, the conspiracy theory is a conspiracy theory, it's what they want you to think.
A: You are just using the Conspiracy-Loop Argument.
by Azshara October 24, 2020