Logical Fallacy of Argument by Emotive Language

The logical fallacy of argument by emotive language occurs when someone substitutes emotive language for true premises that support the conclusion.

Examples of Logical Fallacy of Argument by Emotive Language

"I don't believe in the magic man in the sky or in fairies or leprechauns."

This statement doesn't give a premise for an intensity of unbelief in God but substitutes emotive language for reason. It is used quite often and can be found on atheist comments and atheist websites. However, it is irrational as it is an example of the logical fallacy of argument by emotive language.

"If children are not taught evolution, big bang, and relativism, it will be disastrous."

Here, the emotive word, disastrous, is used rather than sound reasoning. The reality is that evolution has never added anything to any branch of science, unless evolution is now designated as a branch of science. Every true observation is much more easily explained by the Creator God Who holds everything together by His Power and Faithfulness, along with the events of His creation and the great, catastrophic, worldwide flood.

Fallacy Abuse

Sandra: "I'm not saying that I reject God or that I believe that God doesn't exist. I'm saying that I have not seen enough evidence for God to believe in Him." (of course, every reference to God would be in small letters just for the question-begging epithet effect.)

Roxanne: "God reveals Himself and His Truth through the Bible and through creation. He has revealed that that anyone who hears the Good News and doesn't believe it is rejecting God. He also reveals that if anyone speaks His Truth to another and that person rejects that Truth, they are rejecting God. You have been rejecting the Truth that God has revealed to me to give to you. Therefore, you are rejecting God."

Sandra: "You are using the fallacy of emotive language by telling me that I know. I don't know. I told you that I don't know."

Roxanne is being reasonable and speaking the Truth in love. Truth itself is emotive, that is, powerful. For instance, Atheists complain because Christians note that they are rejecting God, so they accuse Christians of using emotive language. They want Christians to modify reality to say, "I understand that God simply hasn't given you enough evidence for you to even know whether or not He exists." Of course, God says that they do know but they reject Him, refuse to acknowledge Him, and are willingly ignorant of the creation, the flood, and the coming judgment. So who are we to believe, the Atheist, or God? If we stick with reality, we have true premises and a true conclusion.

The complexity of God’s Way understood in a single diagram

Obey your flesh and descend into darkness

How can we know anything about anything? That’s the real question