Skip to main content

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

10
  • It is not just a contested premise in this argument, but specifically a "false premise". Here is a link to make that point: effectiviology.com/false-premise
    – Dcleve
    Commented Mar 19, 2022 at 16:59
  • @DcleveThx. I've gone and added your language and link to the Short Answer. Many hands!
    – J D
    Commented Mar 19, 2022 at 17:30
  • Thanks for detailed explanations. I think "contested premise" is relevant since, as mentioned in my comment, I can easily refute with an engineer (A & B are not equal) but not with "boss of boss". You also mention "appeal to authority" which is apparently applicable in the latter case.
    – C D
    Commented Mar 19, 2022 at 22:15
  • That would be, "presumes facts not in evidence"; you have it reversed. More generally, I am not sure that I agree with this style choosing to link every key word or phrase to a Wikipedia article. If someone wants to know more information, they can look it up themselves. I can understand doing it for things that are not well-known, but come on, "metaphor", "debate", "reason"... these are all very commonly known and understood terms. At that point, the constant hyperlinks just become noise. Commented Mar 20, 2022 at 8:29
  • @CodyGray Thanks. I made a correction. : D As for your urge to share your feelings on the elements of style, what sort of reaction on my part are you looking to elicit?
    – J D
    Commented Mar 21, 2022 at 12:58