Lazy Figures of Speach

We're all guilty of it (an example, right there!). Generalizations or truisms that contain little information are used to defend a position. False analogies and straw men that are use to tear a position down.

I'm going to stick to sailors. Politics would take a book.

Just a few from today's forum morning read:

• "I was taught to do it [this way]." I was taught that 2 + 2 = 4, but it did not become a part of my knowledge base until I was shown or figured out why it was true. I would certainly not tell you 2 + 2 = 4 unless I had some basis, other than I was told, that it was true. As you know, I do a lot of testing. That is NOT because I do not believe what I read. I always start with literature research, because many really smart people went before me. But they didn't go down every alley, not everything was published, and things do change.
• I've been [doing X] for 30 years, and [this] has always worked for me." Often used to resist something newfangled. An adding machine works, but an electronic calculator works better. A CQR anchor works, but a Rocna (or other new generation anchor) work better. This can also be used to defend practices that were never very good, but were good enough, since they were never tested in a real crucible.
• I've heard it said that.... This precedes and opinion offered without any support. The writer may not remember the reasoning, he may not have understood it, or it may not exist. We are offered no opportunity to examine the argument, and not convinced that the speaker reviewed it either. It is likely nothing more than parroting, unless followed by support.
• Non-corrosive, when what is meant is corrosion resistant. For example, this from ABYC standard relating to bilge pumps: "h. Hose connections shall be secured with a non-corrosive type of clamp."Standards are supposed to be written using the standard english meanings of words, and new words are only to be defined if you can't find it is a standard (Websters or Oxford) dictionary or if the meaning is necessarily different. Since all of industry refers to stainless steel as "corrosion resistant," this is sloppy writing. What it literally says is that the clamp should not corrode the hose, which is not what they mean.