Fallacies and Topos in Public Critique: The Case of Gus Miftah on Twitter

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Authors

Discussion

This analysis reveals fallacies in public discourse surrounding Gus Miftah, indicating emotional biases affecting judgment.

The research identifies fallacies like ad hominem at 30.2% and ad populum at 15.7%, affecting public arguments.
Findings indicate that 69.86% of judgments expressed negativity towards Gus Miftah, reflecting misjudgment in public critiques.
The study highlights the use of topoi of justice, disadvantage, and humanitarianism in shaping political discourse.
Within Indonesia's socio-cultural context, the analysis emphasizes the emotional fueled nature of public debates.

Naila et al. (2025) studied this question.

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark