search

Become an active member of our fallacy-discussing community (or just become a lurker!)

Argument by Gibberish

(also known as: bafflement, argument by [prestigious] jargon)

Description: When incomprehensible jargon or plain incoherent gibberish is used to give the appearance of a strong argument, in place of evidence or valid reasons to accept the argument.

The more common form of this argument is when the person making the argument defaults to highly technical jargon or details not directly related to the argument, then restates the conclusion.

Logical Form:

Person 1 claims that X is true.

Person 1 backs up this claim by gibberish.

Therefore, X is true.

Example #1:

Fortifying the dextrose coherence leads to applicable inherent of explicable tolerance; therefore, we should not accept this proposal.

Explanation: I have no idea what I just wrote, and the audience will have no idea either -- but the audience (depending on who the audience is) will most likely make the assumption that I do know what I am talking about, believe that they are incapable of understanding the argument and therefore, agree with my conclusion since they think I do understand it.  This is fallacious reasoning.

Example #2: (The following was taken from the movie Spies Like Us where Emmett Fitz-Hume, played by Chevy Chase, was addressing the press.)

Well, of course, their requests for subsidies was not Paraguayan in and of it is as it were the United States government would never have if the president, our president, had not and as far as I know that's the way it will always be. Is that clear?

Explanation: Emmett Fitz-Hume was clearly avoiding having to answer the question, and substituted gibberish for an answer. While the press was metaphorically scratching their heads to figure what what was just said, Emmett moved on without answering the question.

Exception: Some arguments require some jargon or technical explanations.

Tip: Remember that good communication is not about confusing people; it’s about mutual understanding.  Don’t try to impress people with fancy words and jargon, when simpler words will do just fine.

References:
This a logical fallacy frequently used on the Internet. No academic sources could be found.

Questions about this fallacy? Ask our community!

Uncomfortable Ideas: Facts don't care about feelings. Science isn't concerned about sensibilities. And reality couldn't care less about rage.

This is a book about uncomfortable ideas—the reasons we avoid them, the reasons we shouldn’t, and discussion of dozens of examples that might infuriate you, offend you, or at least make you uncomfortable.

Many of our ideas about the world are based more on feelings than facts, sensibilities than science, and rage than reality. We gravitate toward ideas that make us feel comfortable in areas such as religion, politics, philosophy, social justice, love and sex, humanity, and morality. We avoid ideas that make us feel uncomfortable. This avoidance is a largely unconscious process that affects our judgment and gets in the way of our ability to reach rational and reasonable conclusions. By understanding how our mind works in this area, we can start embracing uncomfortable ideas and be better informed, be more understanding of others, and make better decisions in all areas of life.

Get 20% off this book and all Bo's books*. Use the promotion code: websiteusers

* This is for the author's bookstore only. Applies to autographed hardcover, audiobook, and ebook.

Get the Book