[مزدك بامداد]

When force or the threat of force is used to suppress the arguments of one side in a debate, that is a type of one-sidedness. Governments are always tempted to use police powers to prevent criticism of their policies, and totalitarian governments are frequently successful in doing so. Extremists use threats or actual violence to silence those who argue against them. Audience members "shout down" a debater whom they disagree with in order to prevent a case from being heard. This is, unfortunately, common enough to qualify as a logical fallacy.

However, force or the threat of it is not an argument, which means that appealing to force is not a logical fallacy. Since hitting someone over the head with a stick is not an argument at all, a fortiori it is not a fallacious one. However, withholding relevant information can lead people into drawing false conclusions.

آهان،
این نشد
tu quoque
این،
ad hominem
این هم نشد، این
Appeal to Force

اینهم بیجاست، تنها کسی که انیجا زور دارد شمایید
که دست به دگمه ی پانل نشسته اید. جایگاه ما یک
نیروی فرامنشیک است. ما میگوییم که یک دزد،
سزامندی فرامنشیک برای نشستن در جایگاه والای
داوری و نکوهش را ندارد! هیچ کجای اینرا نمیتوانید
با هیچ سفسته ای پیوند بزنید.
•

پارسیگر