Editing Hand-waving (section)

==In debate, generally==
{{anchor|Debate|In debate}}Handwaving is frequently used in low-quality [[debate]], including [[political campaign]]ing and [[Political criticism|commentary]], issue-based [[advocacy]], [[advertising]] and [[public relations]], [[tabloid journalism]], [[Op-ed|opinion piece]]s, [[Internet meme]]s, and informal discussion and writing. If the opponent in a debate or a commentator on an argument alleges hand-waving, it suggests that the proponent of the argument, position or message has engaged in one or more [[Fallacy|fallacies of logic]],<ref name="NHD-JF" /> usually [[Informal fallacy|informal]], and/or glossed over non-trivial details,<ref name="NHD-JF" /> and is attempting to {{em|wave away}} challenges and deflect questions, as if swatting at flies. The ''distraction'' inherent in the sense of the term has become a key part of the meaning.<ref name="NHD-JF" /> The fallacies in question vary, but often include one of the many variants of [[argument to emotion]], and in political discourse frequently involve unjustified assignment or transference of blame. Hand-waving is not itself a fallacy; the proponent's argument may incidentally be correct despite their failure to properly support it.<ref name="NHD-JF" /> A tertiary meaning refers to use of poorly-reasoned arguments specifically to impress<ref name="OxfordDictionaries.com US 2">{{cite web |title=hand-waving |work=Oxford Dictionaries Online |version=American English |date=2015 |url= https://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/hand-waving |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20160201135034/https://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/hand-waving |url-status= dead |archive-date= February 1, 2016 |access-date=January 26, 2015}}</ref> or to persuade.<ref name="Dictionary.com" /><ref name="OxfordDictionaries.com US 2" />

''The New Hacker's Dictionary'' (a.k.a. ''[[Jargon File|The Jargon File]]'') observes:
{{quote|If someone starts a sentence with "Clearly..." or "Obviously..." or "It is self-evident that...", it is a good bet he is about to handwave (alternatively, use of these constructions in a sarcastic tone before a paraphrase of someone else's argument suggests that it is a handwave). The theory behind this term is that if you wave your hands at the right moment, the listener may be sufficiently distracted to not notice that what you have said is bogus [i.e., incorrect]. Failing that, if a listener does object, you might try to dismiss the objection with a wave of your hand.<ref name="NHD-JF" />}}

The implication that hand-waving is done with the specific intent to mislead has long been attached to the term, due to the use of literal waving of a hand – either natural-looking or showy, but never desperate – by [[Magic (illusion)|illusionists]] to distract audiences and [[Misdirection (magic)|misdirect]] their attention from the mechanisms of the [[sleight-of-hand]], [[Glossary of magic (illusion)#G|gimmicked]] props or other trick being used in the performance. This meaning has become reinforced in recent decades by the influence of ''[[Star Wars: A New Hope|Star Wars]]'' (1977) and its sequels, in which the fictional [[Jedi mind trick]] involves a subtle hand wave with mystical powers – that only work on the weak-minded – to disguise reality and compel compliance. Consequently, there is an implication in current usage that a hand-waver may be craftily intending to deceive, and has a low opinion of the intelligence of the opponent or (especially) an audience or the general public. The labels "Jedi hand wave" and "Jedi mind trick" themselves are sometimes applied, in a tongue-in-cheek way, to this manipulation technique in public discourse;<ref name="CBS_Bronco"/> US Congressman [[Luke Messer]]'s use of it in reference to [[President Barack Obama]]'s 2016 [[State of the Union address]] generated headlines.<ref name="Jedi 2">{{Cite news|url=https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-35256156|title = Obama's 'Jedi mind trick' and a revealing admission|work = BBC News|date = 13 January 2016}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=http://fox59.com/2016/01/17/in-focus-rep-messer-calls-presidents-speech-jedi-mind-trick/|title = IN Focus: Rep. Messer calls President's speech 'Jedi mind trick'|date = 17 January 2016}}</ref>

In an unplanned debate or presentation, an off-the-cuff essay, or an informal discussion, the proponent may have little or no time for preparation. Participants in such exchanges may use the term in reference to their own arguments, in the same sense as an author admitting a minor plot flaw {{see below|{{section link||In literary criticism}}}}. When the proponents use the term, they are conceding that they know an ancillary point of or intermediate step in their arguments is poorly supported; they are suggesting that such details are not important and do not affect their key arguments or conclusions, and that the hand-waved details should be excluded from current consideration. Examples include when they believe a statement is true but cannot prove it at that time, and when the sources upon which they are relying conflict in minor ways: "I'm hand-waving over the exact statistics here, but they all show at least a 20% increase, so let's move on".

In formal [[debate competition]], certain forms of hand-waving may sometimes be explicitly permitted. In [[policy debate]], the concept of ''[[Fiat (policy debate)|fiat]]'' allows a team to pursue a line a reasoning based on a scenario that is not presently true, if a judge is satisfied that the case has been that it could become true.