We resume in the columns of this publishing house our patient journey through the anatomy of error and the pathology of discourse in the West. If in the first installment of this comprehensive exegesis of the Dictionary of Fallacies by Ricardo García Damborenea we established the epistemological foundations of straight argumentation and dissected the elementary errors that affect the definition of the essence and the cause, in the present treaty we address the extensive continent of dialectical aberrations where the human intellect capitulates before the tyranny of disordered passions, the fear of repercussions, tribal arrogance and manipulation. affective of the masses. In close cooperation with Dr. María Victoria Ibáñez-Soto in the neurophysiological analysis of the reward and aversion circuits, and with Mr. Juan Pablo Torres-Lozano in the sociological and geopolitical elucidation of collective deception, we propose to demonstrate that public argumentative lying rarely obeys a mere grammatical accident; On the contrary, it constitutes a deliberate subversion of the logical order created to subjugate the judgment of the human person through the hijacking of his biology and his language.

Our first analytical station confronts us with the ad Consequentiam Fallacy, known in scholasticism as the transgression of irrelevant evaluations. This sophism arises when the interlocutor attempts to refute the intrinsic veracity of a proposition by alleging the possible undesirable, unpleasant or unpleasant repercussions of said truth. In the intimacy of brain architecture, this phenomenon represents a capitulation of the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex in the face of a direct assault by the amygdala; The fear of an adverse scenario unleashes a chemical alarm signal that blocks causal reasoning and forces the subject to confuse epistemological validity with pragmatic convenience. Realistic logic is inexorable in proclaiming that the structure of reality remains identical to itself with absolute independence of whether its consequences console or disturb our spirit. The history of thought painfully documents this error in the trial to which Galileo Galilei was subjected, where the controversy shifted from the physical examination of the astronomical data to the institutional fear of the academic shock that would result from validating his calculations; The evidence was not rejected for lack of geometric solidity, but because its certainty was inopportune for the placidity of the established consensus.

In our contemporary times, the ad Consequentiam Fallacy has lorded over the civic and artistic debate under the guise of ideological correction and censorious cancellation. We contemplate with philological astonishment how corporations and informal courts purge classical libraries and condemn immortal literary treatises—from Lope de Vega's Golden Age theater to Mark Twain's costumbrista narrative in his portraits of the Mississippi—not because of a defect in their aesthetic quality or in their historical veracity, but because of the panicked fear that their moral portraits will turn out to be ungrateful to the uncritical sensibility of the modern consumer. This same investment perverts the field of commerce and advertising, where agencies avoid any demonstration of the material or technical quality of a good to saturate the buyer's imagination with irrelevant moral evaluations about ecology, civic prestige or sentimental purity, displacing the criterion of reason towards the indulgence of social applause.