I'm looking for a word that describes the behavior of people, or the people themselves, who debate or make arguments, using incorrect or incomplete facts to make their argument. We see it a lot in the world of politics.

An extreme case would be a holocaust denier like Ahmadinejad. But we also see it in more conventional arguments. For example, both sides suggest that people are twisting facts or making up incorrect "facts" on the causes of global warming. When you listen to the extremes of views (whether polar bears are threatened or thriving, for example), we might not know who is right, but clearly someone is wrong.

We're also are having this problem with three new local government representatives in our community. They are twisting or simply lying about documented facts, and make up or twist descriptions of state laws to promote their agenda. Unfortunately it is still effective, because when they introduce something false into a debate, it will influence some of the respresentatives, and even result in a wrong decision when you cannot get the proof of the errors in time to affect the outcome of the debate.

Is there a good word to describe this, other than just the usual fodder like "misrepresenting the facts?"

Terry

Terry you've probably already been there but if not

http://onelook.com/?w=*&loc=revfp2&clue=specious+arguments

Pseudointellectual as both an adjective and noun.
Lying.
Propaganda.

Mistakes can be intentional or accidental. Some people will do or say anything to get their way. Accidental mistake can be simple or gross. Gross mistakes are often the result of calculated or willful ignorance.

You might look up the word agnotology. It's not what you're asking about, but you should find it interesting.

William James wrote that "most people think they're thinking when really all they're doing is rearranging their prejudices."

Most people think they are being logical when they aren't. Logic is a lot easier to talk about than it is to employ. Logic is trivial - for computers. For humans, not so much. (Search on: THOG LOGIC TEST WASON.) That's the just what we might call the pure logic part. A huge part of the problem of logical reasoning is what I call translation and what philosophers call semantics. Humans are better at it, but still pretty feeble.

I imagine most people are convinced that their own reasoning determines what is logical and what isn't. It's logical, because that's the way I think about it.

Thank you. This helps. I think "sophism" is a reasonable word for what I'm looking for.

Terry

The word that comes to mind is 'casuistry' for the process generally. A particular illogical argument might be said to be 'pseudo-syllogistic' perhaps.

Lying or propaganda, as suggested earlier.

Or: disinformation, which to my mind incorporates both of the above (propaganda is not, per se, always false).

I think the verb would still be "to lie," though.

Pookie, you're back! [HUG] Daggone it, you have too much language skill not to be here, hear?

I think that demagogue would fit at least part of your bill.