الحمد لله نحمده ونستعينه ونستغفره، ونعوذ بالله من شرور أنفسنا، ومن سيئات أعمالنا 

وأشهد أن لا إله إلا الله وحده لا شريك له، وأشهد أن سيدنا محمدًا عبده ورسوله.

The Quran is unique not only because of the breadth of its subjects but also because of its teaching approach that involves the use of demonstrations and examples to make its lessons clearer. 

Regarding the breadth of the topics in the Quran, Allah says:

وَنَزَّلۡنَا عَلَيۡكَ ٱلۡكِتَـٰبَ تِبۡيَـٰنً۬ا لِّكُلِّ شَىۡءٍ۬ وَهُدً۬ى وَرَحۡمَةً۬ وَبُشۡرَىٰ لِلۡمُسۡلِمِينَ (٨٩)

We have sent down to you the Book (the Qur’an) as an exposition of everything, a guidance, a mercy, and glad tidings for the Muslims. (Al-Nahl 16:89)

Regarding the approach that the Quran uses to make the lessons clear, Allah says:

وَلَقَدۡ صَرَّفۡنَا لِلنَّاسِ فِى هَـٰذَا ٱلۡقُرۡءَانِ مِن كُلِّ مَثَلٍ۬ فَأَبَىٰٓ أَكۡثَرُ ٱلنَّاسِ إِلَّا ڪُفُورً۬ا (٨٩)

“And indeed, We have displayed for mankind in this Qur’an all kinds of similitudes, but most of mankind refused to do anything but reject.” (Al-Isra 17:89)

The subjects in the Quran and the examples given are intended not only to develop Muslims’ beliefs and character but also to develop the Muslims cognitive, intellectual and communication abilities.

In this talk I’ll inshallah focus on the Quranic approach to improving the communication skills of Muslims.

Effective communication is required to make sure that there are no misunderstandings between people.  There are several elements for ensuring successful communications with the two key elements are:

1. Clarity/conciseness and
2. Truthfulness/openness.

 In the same way, the two major impediments to effective communication are:

1. Not using concise words or using words that have double meaning, and
2. Using faulty logic or fallacious reasoning.

Proper Choice of Words

Allah teaches us that when we speak, we should not use words that can become derogatory by tongue twisting or in foreign languages. Allah says:

يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا لَا تَقُولُوا رَاعِنَا وَقُولُوا انْظُرْنَا) البقرة(

“O’ you who believe, do not say (to the Prophet) “Ra ina” but say “Un Zurna” (Al-Baqara 2:104)

The companions used to call the Prophet’s attention by saying “Ra’ina” (رَاعِنَا) that means “take care of us” and “consider our condition when guiding us”.  

The word (رَاعِنَا) is related to title used for the shepherd (راعى الغنم) who is responsible to taking care of his flock by guiding them to the proper and safe places of feed.  Also, the term is used in the hadeath (كلكم راع وكلكم مسئول عن رعيته) “Everyone is shepherd and is responsible for his flock.”   

So, the word (رَاعِنَا) is proper word, but Allah prohibited Muslims from using it because by minor tongue-twisting it becomes similar to a derogatory word in Hebrew.  In Hebrew, the word ([r), phonetically “Rah” (راع) means bad, evil, and wicked.  Some of Jews started using it when addressing the Prophet (PBUH) as hidden insult.    

(https://www.biblestudytools.com/lexicons/hebrew/nas/ra.html ).  

To ensure against the wicked use of the word (رَاعِنَا), Allah commanded Muslims to use instead a word (انْظُرْنَا) that means “ look at us” and “give our condition your attention”  which is the same meaning as the word (رَاعِنَا) but it can neither be tongue twisted nor it has negative meaning in other languages.

It is interesting that 1972 Esso applied this lesson and changed its name to Exxon.  The term Esso in the Japanese language means “stalled car”, “a car that ran poorly” (like “clunker” in English).  In selecting a new name, the company searched for a name that has no negative meaning in every known language and they selected “Exxon”.

This command from Allah demands us to always be careful in our choice of words and always choose proper words when we speak to avoid the wrong interpretation.  It is also important for us to know the definition of the words we use to ensure that we use them properly.

This command of prohibiting the use of a good word because it can be abused is part of the Fiqh rule: cutting the pretext (سد الذرائع).  This rule is often used by Muslim jurists to prohibit certain lawful transaction because it can be abused. But excessive application 0f the rule of cutting the pretext can also cause problems.

So, the first element of effective communication is the use of proper and concise words.

Avoid the use of logical fallacies

The second important element of effective communications is to avoid the use of faulty logic, fallacious reasoning or logical fallacies.  Logical fallacies are often used by those who are not truthful to support an argument to exploit, confuse or manipulate the listeners. 

Recognizing the use of logical fallacies (المغالطات المنطقية) is not only important to ensure that you don’t use them when presenting your argument but also to ensure that no one can trick you into agreement by using them in his presentation.

You can easily recognize many of the logical fallacies by the arguments that the disbelievers used to make to justify their rejection of the messengers whom Allah sent to them.  Allah classified these logical fallacies used by the disbelievers as void/false (باطل).  Allah says:

وَمَا نُرۡسِلُ ٱلۡمُرۡسَلِينَ إِلَّا مُبَشِّرِينَ وَمُنذِرِينَ‌ۚ وَيُجَـٰدِلُ ٱلَّذِينَ ڪَفَرُواْ بِٱلۡبَـٰطِلِ لِيُدۡحِضُواْ بِهِ ٱلۡحَقَّ‌ۖ وَٱتَّخَذُوٓاْ ءَايَـٰتِى وَمَآ أُنذِرُواْ هُزُوً۬ا (٥٦) الكهف

“We do not send the messengers except as bearers of good tidings and warners, and those who disbelieve argue based on falsehood in order to nullify the truth with it; and they have taken My signs, and the warnings as mockery.” (Al-Kahf 18:56) 

These logical fallacies are often used by politicians to argue against the position of their opponents and these days, they are often used in many internet forums.   

The first of these fallacies that is very obvious in the argument of the disbelievers is what is known as Ad Hominem (الشخصنة) fallacy.   Ad hominem is Latin for “against the man.” Ad hominem involves the use of personal attacks and insults as if they are an argument or evidence in support of a conclusion.

Instead of advancing good sound reasoning, the disbelievers used to make personal attacks against the messengers as if they are logical argumentation.  The Quran records for us the use of the disbelievers of this fallacy in many verses such as: 

وَقَالَ ٱلۡكَـٰفِرُونَ هَـٰذَا سَـٰحِرٌ۬ كَذَّابٌ (٤)

“And the disbelievers said: “He is a sorcerer, a sheer liar.” (Sad 38:4)

كَذَٲلِكَ مَآ أَتَى ٱلَّذِينَ مِن قَبۡلِهِم مِّن رَّسُولٍ إِلَّا قَالُواْ سَاحِرٌ أَوۡ مَجۡنُونٌ (٥٢)

“Likewise, no Messenger came to those before them, but they said: “A sorcerer or a madman!”” (Al-Dhariyat 51: 52)

 أَءُلۡقِىَ ٱلذِّكۡرُ عَلَيۡهِ مِنۢ بَيۡنِنَا بَلۡ هُوَ كَذَّابٌ أَشِرٌ۬ (٢٥)

“Is it that the Reminder is sent to him [Prophet Salih] alone from among us? No, he is an insolent liar!” (Al-Qamar 54:25)

وَيَقُولُونَ أَٮِٕنَّا لَتَارِكُوٓاْ ءَالِهَتِنَا لِشَاعِرٍ۬ مَّجۡنُونِۭ (٣٦) الصافات

“And used to say, “Are we really to leave our gods because of an insane poet?” (Al-Saffat 37:36)

This ad hominem fallacy of rejecting someone’s opinion on the basis of personal background is often used in Islamic debates.  A person who are graduated from religious universities discredits anyone who is not graduated from religious universities when he discusses a religious issue on the ground that he is not qualified without even attempting to present serious counter argument.

The opposite is true, the person who is graduated from science universities attacks a person who is graduated from religious universities when he interprets scientific verses in the Quran on the ground that he is not qualified.

Once I listened to a TV debate between Dr. Zaghloul El Naggar (زغلول النجار) who hold Ph.D in geology from the University of Wales and publishes heavily on Scientific Concepts in the Quran and Dr. Abdul Sabbour Shaheen (د. عبد الصبور شاهين) who wrote a book entitled (أبي آدم. قصة الخليقة بين الأسطورة والحقيقة) “My Father Adam, the story of man’s creation between myth and Truth” in which he presented the case from the Quran that Adam was not the first human on earth.  He argued that Adam was the father of man but not the father of humans (أن آدم هو أبو الإنسان وليس أبا البشر). 

Instead of presenting counter explanation of the verses of the Quran to refute the thesis of Dr. Abdul Sabbour book, all what Dr. Zaghloul did is to attack Dr. Abdul Sabbour that he is not a scientist to understand this topic and he should not have written this book because Dr. Abdul Sabbour is merely a professor of Arabic and Islamic Studies.    

The Ad Hominem fallacy is only used by those who have no logical argument to present and therefore, they distract from serious debate by using insults and personal attacks. 

This fallacy is commonly used in politics to manipulate voters by appealing to irrelevant name-calling instead of addressing core issues. In this last election cycle, personal attacks were often used such as: “Crooked Hillary, “Wicked Witch of the West Wing,” “Low Energy Jeb”, “Lyin’ Ted”, “Truly weird Rand Paul”, “Little Marco”, etc.

As an advice to myself and to you is to never use this Ad Hominem fallacy when discussing a matter with your wife or children.  Insulting them, raising your voice and getting angry are only signs that you do not have good argument.  So, admit that you don’t know and let it go.

The second form of the logical fallacies that the disbelievers used is known as the Strawman Argument (رجل القش).  This Strawman argument is named after the harmless, scarecrow. In the strawman argument, the person attacks a loosely equivalent yet unrelated position which the opponent never intended to make anyway.

The strawman arguments and ad hominem fallacies can occur together.  The disbelievers often used these two fallacies together.  The master of this was Fir’aun.

Prophets Musa and Haroun went to the Pharaoh asking him to release the Israelite from their bondage by saying:

إِنَّا رَسُولَا رَبِّكَ فَأَرۡسِلۡ مَعَنَا بَنِىٓ إِسۡرَٲٓءِيلَ وَلَا تُعَذِّبۡہُمۡ‌ۖ (٤٧)

“We are the messengers of your Lord. So, let the children of Israel go with us, and do not persecute them. (Taha 20:47)

Instead of making a real argument why he should not release the children of Israel, Fir’aun (the Pharaoh) used both the Strawman Argument and the Ad Hominem fallacy to distract from the real issue.  Here are some of the distractions made by Fir’aun:

قَالَ فَمَا بَالُ ٱلۡقُرُونِ ٱلۡأُولَىٰ (٥١)

“He said, “Then, what about the earlier generations?” (Taha 20:57)

The status of the earlier generation who are already dead has nothing to do with what Prophet Musa is asking for.   Then Fir’aun also said:

قَالَ أَجِئۡتَنَا لِتُخۡرِجَنَا مِنۡ أَرۡضِنَا بِسِحۡرِكَ يَـٰمُوسَىٰ (٥٧)

“He Said, O’ Musa “Have you come to us to drive us out of our land with your sorcery?” (Taha 20:57)

Prophet Musa never even hinted to driving the Egyptian form their land, but Fir’aun wanted to draw the argument with Musa in a different direction.

Fir’aun (Pharaoh) continued his Strawman argument and added to it the insults by saying: 

وَنَادَىٰ فِرۡعَوۡنُ فِى قَوۡمِهِۦ قَالَ يَـٰقَوۡمِ أَلَيۡسَ لِى مُلۡكُ مِصۡرَ وَهَـٰذِهِ ٱلۡأَنۡهَـٰرُ تَجۡرِى مِن تَحۡتِىٓ‌ۖ أَفَلَا تُبۡصِرُونَ (٥١) أَمۡ أَنَا۟ خَيۡرٌ۬ مِّنۡ هَـٰذَا ٱلَّذِى هُوَ مَهِينٌ۬ وَلَا يَكَادُ يُبِينُ (٥٢) فَلَوۡلَآ أُلۡقِىَ عَلَيۡهِ أَسۡوِرَةٌ۬ مِّن ذَهَبٍ أَوۡ جَآءَ مَعَهُ ٱلۡمَلَـٰٓٮِٕڪَةُ مُقۡتَرِنِينَ (٥٣) ]سُوۡرَةُ الزّخرُف[

“And (Pharaoh) proclaimed among his people, saying, “Does not the kingdom of Egypt belong to me, and these rivers are flowing right underneath me? Do you, then, not discern? (51)

Or (do you not see that) I am much better than this one (Musa) who is worthless and can hardly express himself? (52)

So why were the bracelets of gold not sent down to him, or (why) did the angels not come along with him as companions?” (Al-Zukhruf 43:51-53)

The same Tactics were used against other Prophets.  When Prophet Saleh came to the people of Thamud, they caused the distraction by making irrelevant statements instead of arguing against his message to them, they said:  

فَقَالُوٓاْ أَبَشَرً۬ا مِّنَّا وَٲحِدً۬ا نَّتَّبِعُهُ ۥۤ إِنَّآ إِذً۬ا لَّفِى ضَلَـٰلٍ۬ وَسُعُرٍ (٢٤) أَءُلۡقِىَ ٱلذِّكۡرُ عَلَيۡهِ مِنۢ بَيۡنِنَا بَلۡ هُوَ كَذَّابٌ أَشِرٌ۬

“And they said: “shall we follow one human being from among us? We will then be in error and insanity!  Is it that the Reminder is sent to him [Prophet Salih] alone from among us? No, he is an insolent liar!”  (Al-Qamar 54:24-25)

Instead of presenting any valid argument against the Quran that was revealed to them, the disbelievers’ argument was to ask for another Quran

وَإِذَا تُتۡلَىٰ عَلَيۡهِمۡ ءَايَاتُنَا بَيِّنَـٰتٍ۬‌ۙ قَالَ ٱلَّذِينَ لَا يَرۡجُونَ لِقَآءَنَا ٱئۡتِ بِقُرۡءَانٍ غَيۡرِ هَـٰذَآ أَوۡ بَدِّلۡهُ‌ۚ

And when Our Clear Verses are recited unto them, those who do not want to meet Us, say: Bring us a Qur’an other than this, or change it.” (Yunus 10:15)

This similar to when you make a good argument and your opponent’s counter argument is asking you to say something else.

When Prophet Shu‘aib was sent to the people of Madian, He said to  them:

وَيَـٰقَوۡمِ أَوۡفُواْ ٱلۡمِڪۡيَالَ وَٱلۡمِيزَانَ بِٱلۡقِسۡطِ‌ۖ وَلَا تَبۡخَسُواْ ٱلنَّاسَ أَشۡيَآءَهُمۡ وَلَا تَعۡثَوۡاْ فِى ٱلۡأَرۡضِ مُفۡسِدِينَ (٨٥)

“And O my people! Perfect the measure and balance with justice and do not short the people of their things, and do not go around the earth spreading mischief. ” (Hud 11:85)    Their argument was:

قَالُواْ يَـٰشُعَيۡبُ أَصَلَوٰتُكَ تَأۡمُرُكَ أَن نَّتۡرُكَ مَا يَعۡبُدُ ءَابَآؤُنَآ أَوۡ أَن نَّفۡعَلَ فِىٓ أَمۡوَٲلِنَا مَا نَشَـٰٓؤُاْ‌ۖ إِنَّكَ لَأَنتَ ٱلۡحَلِيمُ ٱلرَّشِيدُ (٨٧)

They said: “O Shu‘aib! Does your prayer command you that we give up what our fathers used to worship, or that we should not deal with our wealth as we wish? (We thought) you are the man of wisdom and guidance.” (Hud 11:87)

Prophet Shu‘aib never inhibited them from having freedom with their wealth, all he asked them is to be honest and just when dealing with others but instead of discussing his command, they changed the subject to something else.   

A third form of logical fallacies is the appeal to authority (استخدام السلطة أو التوسل بالسُّلطة). 

This fallacy involves citing authorities even when the person cites irrelevant authorities, poor authorities, or false authorities for the purpose of steering away from real evidence. 

The disbelievers often used this fallacy by invoking the authority of their fathers or their leaders. 

قَالُوا أَجِئْتَنَا لِنَعْبُدَ اللَّهَ وَحْدَهُ وَنَذَرَ مَا كَانَ يَعْبُدُ آبَاؤُنَا ۖ)  الأعراف (

 “They said: “You have come to us that we should worship Allah Alone and forsake that which our fathers used to worship.” (Al-Araf 7:70)

وَإِذَا قِيلَ لَهُمُ ٱتَّبِعُواْ مَآ أَنزَلَ ٱللَّهُ قَالُواْ بَلۡ نَتَّبِعُ مَآ أَلۡفَيۡنَا عَلَيۡهِ ءَابَآءَنَآ‌ۗ أَوَلَوۡ كَانَ ءَابَآؤُهُمۡ لَا يَعۡقِلُونَ شَيۡـًٔ۬ا وَلَا يَهۡتَدُونَ (١٧٠)

“When it is said to them: “Follow what Allah has revealed,” they say: “We follow that on which we have found our fathers.” Is it so, even though their fathers had no understanding at all, and had no guidance?” (Al-Baqara 2:170)

وَلَمَّا جَآءَهُمُ ٱلۡحَقُّ قَالُواْ هَـٰذَا سِحۡرٌ۬ وَإِنَّا بِهِۦ كَـٰفِرُونَ (٣٠) وَقَالُواْ لَوۡلَا نُزِّلَ هَـٰذَا ٱلۡقُرۡءَانُ عَلَىٰ رَجُلٍ۬ مِّنَ ٱلۡقَرۡيَتَيۡنِ عَظِيمٍ (٣١))  الزخرف (

“And when the truth came to them, they (the disbelievers) said: “This is magic, and we totally disbelieve in it.” (30) And they say: “Why this Quran was not revealed on a great man of the two towns (Makkah and Tâif)?” (Al-Zughruf 43:31)

The appealing to authority can be fallacy because even authorities can be wrong. As example, the science experts in the 16th century thought the Earth was the center of the solar system and this turned out to be wrong.

Also, until the late 1990s, scientists thought that gravity must be slowing down the expansion of the universe. Recent discoveries confirmed that the universe is expanding in far faster speed which has changed everything scientists originally knew about the cosmos.

This fallacy is often used in marketing to justify the quality and the value of products by using famous athletes as spokespersons, but that doesn’t make the athlete a relevant authority when it comes to product. This is a fallacy of irrelevant authority.

While most of what I present to you is from references, other than quoting the Quran and the authentic hadeath, I don’t give names of references because I want you to accept or reject any thing I say based on its own merit and not based on who said it.  

I also asking you that when you inform anyone of an interpretation that you heard from me, don’t refer to me, if you get convinced with it, it will be yours when you share it.   If you are not convinced with what I said, don’t share it with anyone.  Your responsibility when you read or hear anything is to analyze it and only accept what you consider proper.  

In my Dua, I always say (اللهم اجعلنا ممن يستمعون القول فيتبعون أحسنه) that means O’ Allah make us of those who listen and follow what is best.  This is a quote from Surat Al-Zumur (39:18) in which Allah describes the believing servants (قُلۡ يَـٰعِبَادِ ٱلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُواْ) by saying about them:

ٱلَّذِينَ يَسۡتَمِعُونَ ٱلۡقَوۡلَ فَيَتَّبِعُونَ أَحۡسَنَهُ ۥۤ‌ۚ أُوْلَـٰٓٮِٕكَ ٱلَّذِينَ هَدَٮٰهُمُ ٱللَّهُ‌ۖ وَأُوْلَـٰٓٮِٕكَ هُمۡ أُوْلُواْ ٱلۡأَلۡبَـٰبِ

“Those who listen to what is said and follow the best of it. Those are the ones whom Allah has guided, and those are the ones who possess understanding.” (Al-Zumur 39:18)

Imam Ibn Hazm (ابن حزم) said:

ابن حزم حيث قال: لا يحل لأحد أن يأخذ قول أحد غير رسول الله -صلى الله عليه وسلم- بلا برهان)

“It is prohibited to follow the opinion of anyone without a proof except the Prophet (PBUH)”

Obviously, the only proofs that are acceptable to support any religious opinion are quotes from the Quran and the authentic Hadeath.  

Even when it comes to Allah’s revelation, Allah informs that prophet’s (PBUH) role is only to deliver and explain the revelation and it is up to the people to reflect on it.  Alalh says in Surat Al-Nahl:

وَأَنزَلۡنَآ إِلَيۡكَ ٱلذِّڪۡرَ لِتُبَيِّنَ لِلنَّاسِ مَا نُزِّلَ إِلَيۡہِمۡ وَلَعَلَّهُمۡ يَتَفَكَّرُونَ

“And We have also sent down unto you (O Muhammad SAW) the Dhikr (the Quran), that you may explain clearly to the people what is sent down to them, and that they may give thought” (Al-Nahl 16:44) “

Look at this verse, the Prophet’s role is to explain the revelation but you are I have the responsibility to give it our serious thought.  Allah did not say, “that they may follow you, Allah said “that they may think”; Allah wants us to think and no follow blindly.    

A fourth form of logical fallacies is appealing to Ignorance (الاحتكام إلي الجهل). 

Using ignorance as a major premise to support an argument is cheap and manipulative. 

Disbelievers often used this fallacy by claiming that they have never heard of this message before, therefore it must be false. As example:

أَجَعَلَ ٱلۡأَلِهَةَ إِلَـٰهً۬ا وَٲحِدًا‌ۖ إِنَّ هَـٰذَا لَشَىۡءٌ عُجَابٌ۬ (٥)

“Has he made all the gods into One God. This is a very strange thing, indeed!”” (Sad 38:5)

 مَا سَمِعۡنَا بِہَـٰذَا فِى ٱلۡمِلَّةِ ٱلۡأَخِرَةِ إِنۡ هَـٰذَآ إِلَّا ٱخۡتِلَـٰقٌ (٧)

“We never heard of this in the religion of the past. This is nothing but an invention!” (Sad 38:7)

فَلَمَّا جَآءَهُم مُّوسَىٰ بِـَٔايَـٰتِنَا بَيِّنَـٰتٍ۬ قَالُواْ مَا هَـٰذَآ إِلَّا سِحۡرٌ۬ مُّفۡتَرً۬ى وَمَا سَمِعۡنَا بِهَـٰذَا فِىٓ ءَابَآٮِٕنَا ٱلۡأَوَّلِينَ (٣٦)

“So when Musa came to them with Our clear signs, they said, “This is nothing but a forged magic, and we have never heard this in the days of our forefathers.” (Al-Qasas 28:36)

It is interesting that using ignorance as a major premise can be used to support contradictory conclusions such as:  

“No one has ever been able to prove definitively that extra-terrestrials exist, so they must not be real.”

“No one has ever been able to prove definitively that extra-terrestrials do not exist, so they must be real.”

I’ll stop with these four logical fallacies and inshallah in future talks, we can discuss other fallacies and how that have been used by the disbelievers.   These other fallacies that we can discuss later include: 

Slippery Slope Fallacy (الانزلاق بالنتائج): The fallacy works by moving from a seemingly benign premise through long series of steps to an improbable extreme that no one accepts. Slippery slope concept is not always wrong, some slippery slope arguments can be valid.  But using slippery slope as basis for argument requires great wisdom. 

The slippery slope is the basis for the Fiqh rule cut the pretext (سد الذرائع).  But excessive use of this role will result in major harm by imposing major restrictions on Muslims because you can prohibit many things that are hallal on the basis of the slippery slope argument because they can lead to something bad.

False Dilemma/ False Dichotomy Fallacy: This fallacy involves limiting the options to two when there are in fact more options to choose from.  Like saying you are with us or against us.  Or say you either support going to war or you are coward.  This fallacy is often used as manipulative tool to polarize the audience by honoring one side and demonizing the other.

The bandwagon Fallacy (مع الجماعة): The fallacy is made by assuming something is true (or right, or good) because other people agree with it. Actually, you may note in the Quran that Allah says that the majority are often wrong.  Allah says:

‌ۚ إِنِ ٱلۡحُكۡمُ إِلَّا لِلَّهِ‌ۚ أَمَرَ أَلَّا تَعۡبُدُوٓاْ إِلَّآ إِيَّاهُ‌ۚ ذَٲلِكَ ٱلدِّينُ ٱلۡقَيِّمُ وَلَـٰكِنَّ أَڪۡثَرَ ٱلنَّاسِ لَا يَعۡلَمُونَ (٤٠)

“Sovereignty belongs to none but Allah. He has ordained that you shall not worship anyone but Him. This is the only right path. But most of the people do not know” (Yunus 12:40)

Circular argument (المنطق الدائري): This fallacy involves making an assumption and then stating it as argument. 

Hasty generalization (مغالطة التعميم):  This involves making general statement without sufficient evidence to support it and then using it to reach unwarranted conclusion.

Equivocation (المراوغة): This happens when a word, phrase, or sentence is used deliberately to make the audience think you’re saying something you’re not.

Appeal to pity.  The fallacy appeals to the compassion and emotional sensitivity of others when the factors mentioned are not relevant to the argument.

Red Herring Fallacy (الرنجة الحمراء): is used as a distraction from the main topic of discussion to something else that seems to be relevant but it is not really on-topic. Often, a red herring fallacy can be difficult to identify because it’s not always clear how different topics relate.

The phrase “red herring” refers to the training device that is used to test how well a hunting dog could track a scent without getting distracted. The method involves placing a red herring nearby because it has an aroma that is so strong and delectable to dogs.

Inshallah, we can expand on these fallacies and how the disbelievers used them in future talks.

DUA