Arguments should be based on reasonable logical constructions. The best online guide I've come across to what constitutes a reasonable logical construction is N

Arguments should be based on reasonable logical constructions. The best online guide I've come across to what constitutes a reasonable logical construction is Nizkor's Fallacies: https://www.nizkor.org/fallacies/ https://www.nizkor.org/fallacies/ Here's an example: Special Pleading > "Description of Special Pleading: Special Pleading is a fallacy in which a person applies standards, principles, rules, etc. to others while taking herself (or those she has a special interest in) to be exempt, without providing adequate justification for the exemption. This sort of "reasoning" has the following form: Person A accepts standard(s) S and applies them to others in circumtance(s) C. Person A is in circumstance(s) C. Therefore A is exempt from S. People committing Special Pleading are claiming that they are exempt from certain principles or standards yet they provide no good reason for their exemption." E.g. Russia was widely condemned for civilian casualties in their war in Ukraine by US government representatives but Israel is not condemned for civilian casualties in their war on Gaza by US government representatives.