Output 2

Arguments and argumentation


Monological rhetorical genres

Dialogical rhetorical genres

Arguments and argumentation

Rhetorical figures, tropes and techniques

Presentation: types, features

Media rhetoric, civil rhetoric, virtual rhetoric

Arguments and reasoning



Sources of arguments

1. Authenticity of the source

2. Credibility of the information

3. Reliability of the information

4. Methodology

5. Validation of the authenticity of the source

6. Verifying the argument and source


– Tables

– Diagrams

– Maps

– Infographics


A syllogism, a form of proof construction originally formulated by Aristotle, is a deductive inference formed from two premises connected by a middle term from which a conclusion is drawn. Syllogisms construct the proper movement of the argument and arriving at a conclusion by starting from the premises and forming the proof from them. The syllogism is a form that is applied in rhetoric, but it is tied specifically to logic, a specific part of which is the rhetorical proof. Example of a syllogistic construction:

All men are mortal. (big premise)

All Greeks are human. (small premise)


All Greeks are mortal. (conclusion)

Enthymeme (a type of syllogism) – a form of proof construction, a variant of the syllogism that was originally formulated by Aristotle. It is most often used in two different senses:

In one case, “enthymeme” is a classical form of syllogism, but it is used during a speech or dialogue in such a way that the speaker enunciates part of the premises and the audience adds what is missing, for example:

The wise are just, therefore Socrates is just”, and the hearer adds the small premise by rote: “Socrates is wise”. Thus the enthymeme is called a “shortened syllogism” because the whole construction of the syllogism is not uttered or it is an applied use of a syllogism during public speech.

In the latter case, the “enantime” is not a shorthand syllogism, but is a specific form of syllogism characteristic of argumentative rhetoric, in which a major premise is not something that is “necessary” but something that is “probable.” It is not something that is “always valid”, but is something that is “valid in most cases”, or is “valid in a single case but presented by an authority”. Thus the enthymeme is an available substitution or syllogism that applies not in the realm of thinking, but in the realm of human actions that never have absolute necessity, for example:

We see politicians lie all the time. (big premise)

This one here is a baked politician. (small premise)


For sure and most likely he is lying to you. (conclusion)

  • Георги Петков, Реториката в системата на науките, Реторика и комуникации. последно посещение на 12.09.2021.
  • Georgy Petkov, The rhetoric of ta in the system of sciences, Rhetoric and Communications. last visit 12.09.2021.

Argument from authority

“… Argument from authority is an appeal to an authority’s claim that uses their expertise as a base for the conclusion that their views should be accepted” (p. 313). He explains the verbal scheme of this argument “A good argument from authority supports a claim on the basis that the person or group who endorse it is deemed to have (1) certain stated credentials, which are (2) relevant to the claim in question, and (3) no biases that are likely to interfere with their assessment of the claim, provided that (4) the claim in question concerns an area in which there is wide among the relevant experts, and that (5) the claim concern and area of knowledge in which consensus is possible (Groarke & Tindale, 2012: 318).

(Groarke & Tindale 2012: 450)

  • Groarke, L. A. & Tindale, C. W. (2012). Good Reasoning Matters! A Constructive Approach to Critical Thinking. 5th ed. Toronto: Oxford University Press Canada.

Argument from/on authority

Quotations and reference to famous people: politicians, statesmen, thinkers, philosophers, writers, opinion leaders, intellectuals, etc.

The aim is to convince the audience of the rightness of the speaker or the advantages of his thesis, proposal, idea, concept, program on the basis of the acceptance of the authoritative personality who also shares this opinion, position, cause, value.

There are well-established authorities in a given field, party, country, era, and they are known in depth and not quoted on principle.

  • Мавродиева, И. (2013). Реторика и пъблик рилейшънс. София: УИ „Св. Климент Охридски”.
  • Mavrodieva, I. (2013). Rhetoric and Public Relations. Sofia: Sofia University Press “St. Kliment Ohridski”

Argumentum ad rem

argumentum ad rem

A relevant argument. An argument concerning the point under discussion. Units of mottoes and proverbs listed by groups: A to X.

Found on

Argumentum ad rem

An argument to the point – distinguished from such evasions as argumentum ad hominem (q.v.), etc. A.C.
Found on

Arumentum ad rem: ‘an argument that is based on logical evidence and facts’, but which is also presented as a judgment derived from facts(Georgiev, Latin Dictionary 2020: 20). An argument in substance is based on actually existing ones, on actual evidence, and is essentially aimed at proving the proposition precisely with credible facts, and is not associated with manipulation or with inauthenticity in any way because it demonstrates both rhetorical competence and adherence to ethical norms and rules.

  • Мавродиева, И. (2013). Реторика и пъблик рилейшънс. София: УИ „Св. Климент Охридски”, 165.
  • Mavrodieva, I. (2013). Rhetoric and Public Relations. Sofia: Sofia University Press “St. Kliment Ohridski”, 165.

An argument conditionally called “local topic” – “local material

This is an argument that is made after facts have been researched, analysed and extracted from historical events and personalities in a region, locality, country. This argument combines with the compliment and serves to break the ice. Through the local material argument, tolerance, respect and knowledge of the situation and audience is demonstrated.

  • Mavrodieva, I. et al. (2021). Online Course in Rhetoric. Glossary. Sofia: Institute of Rhetoric and Communciations. ISBN 978-619-91989-1-9, ISBN 978-619-91989-0-2

What better place to speak of Europe’s future than a building which so gloriously recalls the greatness that Europe had already achieved over 600 years ago.

Your city of Bruges has many other historical associations for us in Britain. Geoffrey Chaucer was a frequent visitor here.

And the first book to be printed in the English language was produced here in Bruges by William Caxton.

  • 1988 Sep 20, Margaret Thatcher – Speech to the College of Europe (“The Bruges Speech”)

Argumentum Ad Verecundiam

Argumentum Ad Verecundiam
(Argument from Authority)

Abstract: The argument from appeal to authority, the ad verecundiam fallacy, is characterized by examples and shown to be a fallacy when the appeal is to an irrelevant authority and nonfallacious when the appeal is to a relevant authority.”

Argumentum Ad Verecundiam

Argumentum ad verecundiam, or argument from authority, is a logical argument that infers something is true on the basis that a knowledgeable and well-reputed person has said it.

argument from authority may be valid or invalid, depending on the circumstances.

If the trustworthy person is also an expert in the field, and is free to speak their mind about the matter, then the argument has some validity. Otherwise, it generally does not.

That said, argumentum ad verecundiam can never serve as a (mathematical) proof, since no authority could ever be infallible.”


The orator reads on prestige, on celebrity, on popular names and on established personalities, but these names and their positions and achievements are communicated independently of the issue and the specifics of an issue or thesis.

  • Мавродиева, И. (2013). Реторика и пъблик рилейшънс. София: УИ „Св. Климент Охридски”, 158.
  • Mavrodieva, I. (2013). Rhetoric and Public Relations. Sofia: Sofia University Press “St. Kliment Ohridski”, 158.

Argumentum ipse dixit

The Latin form of the expression Ipse dixit , which means “he said it himself”, is attributed to the Roman philosopher Marcus Tullius Cicero (106-43 BC)1 .

It is an affirmation without proof, or a dogmatic expression of opinion, or a fallacy that consists in defending a proposition by stating, without further justification, that it is “exactly as it is” because it is an intrinsic, immutable question, namely: the argumentum ad verecundiam or argumentum magister dixit.

The argumentum ad verecundiam or argumentum magister dixit is a Latin expression that means an appeal to authority or an argument based on authority that dispenses reasoning or evidence. It is a logical prose that is supported by the word or reputation of some authority or institution in order to validate the argument. And absurdly and conveniently its conclusions are based exclusively on the credibility of the author of the proposition and not on the reasons that he or she presented to support it.”


Аrgumentum ad populum

In fallacy: Material fallacies

false, ( b) the argument ad populum (an appeal “to the people”), which, instead of offering logical reasons, appeals to such popular attitudes as the dislike of injustice, ( c) the argument ad misericordiam (an appeal “to pity”), as when a trial lawyer, rather than arguing for his client’s innocence,…”

fallacious argument that concludes a proposition to be true because many or all people believe it; it alleges that “if many believe so, it is so”.

argumentum ad populum

A fallacious argument that concludes a proposition to be true because many or all people believe it; it alleges that many believe so, it is .

Etymology: : argumentum + ad + populum (accusative singular of populus, “people”, “nation”) ≈ “appeal to the people”


argumentum ad populum


from Wiktionary, Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License.

  • noun logical fallacy A fallacious argument that concludes a proposition to be true because many or all people believe it; it alleges that “if many believe so, it is so”.


from Wiktionary, Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License

Latin: argūmentum („argument”, “proof“) + ad („to”, “toward“) + populum (accusative singular of populus, “people”, “nation”) ≈ “appeal to the people”


This argument does not use dominantly credible facts and does not make a logical argument. In an argumentum ad populum, arguments are not addressed to an educated and intellectual audience that would question them and find them to be factually untrue, or attack sides that are not real, or make suggestions that could not be implemented.

  • Мавродиева, И. (2013). Реторика и пъблик рилейшънс. София: УИ „Св. Климент Охридски”, 160.
  • Mavrodieva, I. (2013). Rhetoric and Public Relations. Sofia: Sofia Universirty Press “St. Kliment Ohridski”.

Argument from Personal Experience

The argument from personal experience, also known as personal revelation, refers to the sensation of a direct experience with God or the supernatural. This can be a feeling of divine presence, creative inspiration, the experience of a vision, or could even be in the form of a conversation. This argument is particularly common among certain branches of Christianity where things like possession and levitation have been reported. However, many believers do not experience personal revelations and have other foundations for their beliefs. Personal experiences are subjective and, as such, cannot be directly shared, only anecdotally shared. One popular form of the argument is from near-death experiences.”


 David Fleming  

This is one of the most common and pernicious ways of destroying an argument. The indignant private anecdote trumps all other collective experience, research, historical precedent or evaluation: I was made better/worse by the hospital (“I wouldn’t be alive now if . . . ”/“My brother would be alive now if . . . ”), so I know how to run the health service. Time, now, for wisdom to slink away in shame. You can’t disagree with my personal experience because it happened to me. And if you do, I will take it as a personal attack (Ad Hominem).

This may, at a pinch, be a justifiable position to take. If you have seen for yourself the fissures in Arctic ice, this may well add to the authority with which you can speak about the reality of climate change. But its chief contribution to argument is destructive. The point is, you can’t argue against it, because you are pitting logic against passionate emotion, and it doesn’t work. It can be useful to bear in mind, or even to point out, that personal experience can in fact be a substantial source of bias in a person’s argument: she may be drawing general conclusions from exceptional cases; she may be validating her career experience by reading more significance into it than it deserves. Personal experience erodes objectivity, and can reduce knowledge of a subject by closing down any willingness to find out more about it.”


Argument from personal experience is “setting a ‘positive or negative example,’“ to build an argument, and the speaker attempts by sharing to persuade the audience to follow or not follow his example, to repeat or not repeat his action.Мавродиева, И. (2013). Реторика и пъблик рилейшънс. София: УИ „Св. Климент Охридски”, 156.

  • Mavrodieva, I. (2013). Rhetoric and Public Relations. Sofia: Sofia Universirty Press “St. Kliment Ohridski”, 156.

Argumentum ad Baculum

Abstract: The argumentum ad baculum is based upon the appeal to force or threat in order to bring about the acceptance of a conclusion. The fallacy is explained here in both its fallacious and its nonfallacious forms with illustrative examples.”



  • If you are not with me, then you are against me, therefore you leave the party, the organization, the post.
  • If you don’t achieve the goals in the plan, you lose the post.
  • If you don’t meet the EU criteria on reducing corruption, you reduce fund income and funding.
  • The Department of Economic Affairs should reconsider the proposals to reduce the Sector X budget for the following reason. If this is not done, funds will be diverted to Sector F and money is lost to … This could lead to social disruption and…
  • I am confident that you will vote in favour of my proposal for more funds for prevention in the ecology sector. Otherwise, we expect a rise of the opposition and the Greens and changes in government that are not in your favour.

Project RHEFINE – Rhetoric for Innovative Education, Number 2020-1-PL01-KA203-082274, Erasmus+ Programme, Key Action 2, Cooperation for innovation and the exchange of good practices – Strategic Partnerships for Higher Education.


University of Warsaw – Poland – coordinator

Institute of Rhetoric and Communication – Bulgaria

University of Zagreb – Croatia