Informal Fallacy: Verbosity

The verbosity fallacy, also known as as argumentum verbosium, proof by verbosity, or proof by intimidation, occurs when someone tries to win an argument by overwhelming their opponent with an excessive amount of words or information, rather than focusing on the quality of their argument. This fallacy relies on the belief that more words equate to a more convincing argument, when in reality, it is the substance and logic of the argument that should be the focus.

Examples:

1. In science, this can manifest when a researcher presents a barrage of data, jargon, and mathematical equations, assuming that the sheer volume of information will persuade peers and the public. For example, a scientist might list numerous irrelevant statistics and complex theories to support a hypothesis, overshadowing the lack of robust evidence or logical coherence. This tactic can be particularly misleading in scientific debates, where a clear and concise presentation of facts should prevail. 
2. The verbosity fallacy is when a person uses complex language and jargon to confuse their opponent and make their argument seem more legitimate. By using technical terms or elaborate explanations, the speaker can create the illusion of expertise and credibility, even if the actual content of their argument is lacking. This tactic is often used in academic or professional settings to intimidate others and assert dominance in a conversation.
3. The verbosity fallacy is when a person includes a large number of irrelevant details or tangents in their argument, in an attempt to distract or sidetrack their opponent. By bombarding their opponent with extraneous information, the speaker can make it difficult for the other person to follow the main point of the argument, and therefore weaken their position in the debate. This strategy is often employed by politicians, atheists or public speakers who wish to avoid addressing difficult questions or issues directly.
4. The verbosity fallacy is often used by individuals who lack confidence in the strength of their argument, and therefore resort to using quantity over quality to make their point. By inundating their opponent with a deluge of words or information, the speaker hopes to convince others of the validity of their position, without actually providing solid evidence or reasoning to support their claims. This tactic is a common strategy in debate competitions or public speaking events, where participants may rely on rhetorical flourishes or grandiloquence to mask the weaknesses in their argument.
5. The verbosity fallacy can also be seen in media or advertising, where companies may use excessive language or imagery to persuade consumers to buy their products or services. By bombarding potential customers with a barrage of marketing messages or promotional materials, the company can create a sense of urgency or exclusivity around their offerings, and compel individuals to make impulsive purchasing decisions. This tactic plays off of people's emotions and desires, rather than their rational judgment, and can lead to buyer's remorse or dissatisfaction with the product.
6. The verbosity fallacy can occur in interpersonal relationships, where one person may use a torrent of words or excuses to avoid taking responsibility for their actions or addressing problems in the relationship. By inundating their partner with elaborate justifications or explanations, the individual can deflect blame or criticism and prevent meaningful communication or resolution of conflicts. This tactic can erode trust and intimacy in the relationship, and create barriers to open and honest communication between partners.
7. The verbosity fallacy can also be used in legal or judicial proceedings, where a lawyer or litigant may overwhelm the court with an abundance of evidence or arguments in an attempt to sway the jury or judge in their favor. By inundating the court with a flood of information or testimony, the attorney can create confusion or doubt in the minds of the decision-makers, and make it more difficult for them to discern the truth or make a fair judgment. This tactic is often employed in high-stakes cases or trials, where the outcome can have significant consequences for the parties involved.
8. In physiology, for instance, extensive detailing of cellular processes can obscure the fundamental principles at play, leading to confusion rather than clarity. 
9. Medicine is not immune to this fallacy; a physician's lengthy explanation of treatment options may overwhelm a patient, causing unnecessary anxiety without contributing to their understanding of the condition. 
10. In pharmacy, an exhaustive list of medication side effects, while thorough, might lead to patient non-compliance due to the sheer volume of information. 
11. In dentistry, the technical description of procedures can cause patient apprehension, overshadowing the benefits and necessity of dental care.
12. Astronomy, with its vastness, can also succumb to verbosity when the intricate descriptions of celestial mechanics overshadow the awe-inspiring simplicity of the stars' lifecycle. 
13. Neurology faces a similar challenge; the elaborate discussion of neural pathways can detract from the understanding of neurological functions. 
14. Economics, with its intricate models and theories, can become impenetrable when verbosity masks the underlying economic concepts that are crucial for policy-making. 
15. Political discourse is often criticized for verbosity, where the substance of policy can be buried under a mountain of rhetoric, leading to public disengagement. 

Conclusion:

While thoroughness is a virtue in academic, professional, business and daily communication, it is essential to balance detail with the need for clarity and comprehension. Succinctness, when appropriate, can often convey a message more effectively than an overabundance of words.

Points to Ponder:

Focus should be on cogent content while eschewing circumlocutory so not become victim of Verbosity fallacy.