This article relies largely or entirely on a
single source. (September 2011) |
Argumentum ad baculum ( Latin for "argument to the cudgel" or "appeal to the stick") is the fallacy committed when one makes an appeal to force [1] to bring about the acceptance of a conclusion. [2] [3] One participates in argumentum ad baculum when one emphasizes the negative consequences of holding the contrary position, regardless of the contrary position's truth value—particularly when the argument-maker himself causes (or threatens to cause) those negative consequences. It is a special case of the appeal to consequences.
The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy gives this example of argumentum ad baculum:
The phrase has also been used to describe the 1856 caning of Charles Sumner, an abolitionist Senator, by one of his pro-slavery opponents, Preston Brooks, on the floor of the United States Senate. [5]
...that uncompromising Sumner whose eloquence exasperated a fiery Southerner into the employment of the argumentum ad baculum...