Personally, I think everyone should study logic, including the illogics - but especially Scientologists. If they would all study the illogics, they might stop using Hubbard's illogics to support their beliefs.
A rather extensive list is here
LogicalFallacies
We have seen some of the true believers use the following illogics just in this thread alone.
- strawman Misrepresenting someone's argument to make it easier to attack.
- ad hominem Attacking your opponent's character in an attempt to undermine their argument.
- burden of proof Saying that the burden of proof lies not with the person making the claim, but with others to disprove.
- appeal to authority Saying that because an authority thinks something, it must therefore be true.
- black-or-white Where two alternative states are presented as the only possibilities, when in fact more possibilities exist.
- anecdotal Using personal experience or an isolated example instead of a valid argument.
- red herring An attempt to divert the debate from the subject being debated.
I noticed, with
appeal to authority, that Scientologists will state
as fact things which, on inspection, were only something claimed by Hubbard without any evidence of its truth. Scientologists do not question.
Imagine what would happen if they knew these tactics were bogus and didn't use them. We might be able to have conversations.