What Should We Call the “Appeal to Chatbot” in Latin?

Douglas Creek where it flows through PKOLS Park, Saanich. Photo by Sean Manning, March 2026.

The Latin language is always expanding. Sometimes this is easy, as when it picked up gladius “sword” from Celtic and sclopetum “arquebus, smoothbore gun” from Italian. Other times it is hard and you have to invent a new word or phrase. Sometimes you even think for a long time and decide that crisare “to shake one’s hips” is good enough substitute for to twerk. Trying to settle an argument by pulling out a dictionary is an argumentum ad dictionarium. What should we call trying to settle an argument by quoting a chatbot?

Slop (“fodder for a pig, output from a chatbot”) is clearly pabulum in Latin (Columnella de re rustica 7.9.7 Internet archive). Its not so clear what a Latinate take of words like bot, generative AI, or large language model would be. The obnoxious thing about these programs is that they emit vast amounts of stuff which sometimes seems plausible but should never be trusted. It does not matter how they work when you have to clean up after them. So after some tooing and froing I decided on fountain of lies or deceitful fountain. One good name would be fons mendacitatis. However, Greyor @[email protected] pointed out that Plautus has the adjective falsidicum “false-speaking.” The ancients did not have a sophisticated language to talk about lies, fiction, bullshit, and shared games, so I will chose the word that delights me and not worry about parsing different kinds of untrustworthy untruths.1

So a LLM chatbot is a fons falsidicus, and the “appeal to chatbot” is an argumentum ad fontem falsidicum. Botanists might have to wait for someone with enough Latin to name a new species, but bookandswordblog readers get this one straight away!

There are some sad things I could say about why some people feel the need to ask chatbots what is true, and about how the playful language games of New England hacker culture turned into the magical thinking and purposeless self-perfection of Bay Area tech culture (already skewered by Plutarch, Life of Pyrrhus, 14.2-8). But the world does not need more sadness and it is a beautiful spring day in Victoria.

The Historical Dictionary of Science Fiction is a great place to explore how robot became bot “diminutive name for a robot” then “automated computer program.” I don’t know of a good successor to the Jargon File since Eric S. Raymond was not a good steward.

PS. Some people call attacking the source of the information an argumentum ad fontem. If you use that, and you want to be clear to young people without Latin who might confuse fons “source of information” and fons “fountain of lies”, you could all the appeal to chatbot an argumentum ad automaton. Greek words were popular in working Latin although pagan writers avoided them in literature. But I think it important that every language have spicy words for the bad and malevolent technology which is American-style generative AI.

(scheduled 23 March 2026)

  • I read an article on true, false, and pseudo-true statements for the Cyrus’ Paradise conference in 2012, but lost access to my notes when a ‘free’ service ran out of money. I will edit this post if I ever find the reference again. Memento mori! And never ever trust a ‘free’ service hosted on someone else’s computer. ↩︎
  • #badArguments #modern #Neolatin #stateOfTheWeb #whimsy

    Changing minds.: Kristyn

    https://www.answers-in-reason.com/comics/changing-minds/

    Made by Kristyn. KristynAutistic, queer, D&D devotee, pun peddler, meme
    dabbler, home-brew hero. Downton Abbey Diogenes! www.answers-in-reason.com

    The post [Changing minds.](https://www.answers-in-reason.com/comics/changing-
    minds/) appeared first on [Answers In Reason](https://www.answers-in-
    reason.com).

    #Comics #Philosophy #BadArguments #AnswersinReason

    Changing minds. » Answers In Reason

    People say they want to change minds, but they really just want to score points.

    Changing minds. » Kristyn » Answers In Reason
    A Response to YouTuber Kristopher Mann » Answers In Reason A response to YouTuber Kristopher Mann's video discussing the debate between The Duke and Steve McRae on Modern Day Debates.

    This is a response to YouTuber Kristopher Mann, who asked me recently to respond to his video about the discussion between The Duke and Steve McRae on Modern Day Debates, as well as a discussion about both The Duke and Kristopher's arguments.

    A Response to YouTuber Kristopher Mann » Dave Rowlands » Answers In Reason
    Hitchens on Antitheism » Answers In Reason

    It's come to my attention in the last year or so, that many are conflating the classical/philosophical definition of atheism with antitheism (sometimes spelt anti-theism). Regardless of your preferred use of atheism and atheist, over the centuries and still today atheism is the belief/proposition/claim there are no gods, with the atheist accepting (believing) this is

    Hitchens on Antitheism » Davidian » Answers In Reason
    Belief: Don’t Believe, Lack of Belief, Absent of Belief – CMT Vol: 11 » Answers In Reason

    Language can be confusing. Words mean particular things and then because they have similar meanings to other words they take on those meanings and then words become so interchangeable it can be hard to know what people mean when they use these words/phrases. One of the common words that gets stretched so thin is belief.

    Belief: Don’t Believe, Lack of Belief, Absent of Belief – CMT Vol: 11 » Davidian » Answers In Reason
    In response to Ra’s ‘What is Atheism?’ » Answers In Reason

    I was invited on Cheshire's live stream 'A Goblin Reads' with Dave as she had seen my discussion with Aron about his belief that 'Rocks are atheist!' who then wrote a post called 'What is Atheism?' Our video on prescriptivism might also be of interest: The article I read (and am responding to) is on

    In response to Ra’s ‘What is Atheism?’ » Davidian » Answers In Reason
    Can you prove a negative? » Answers In Reason

    I often hear my fellow atheists say things like 'You can't prove a negative!' in a debate. This is often in response to either a theist trying to shift the burden of proof, or a misunderstanding of epistemic justification (aka burden of rationality or burden of proof on a belief position). I often respond to

    Can you prove a negative? » Davidian » Answers In Reason
    Reason in the Face of Public Opinion » Answers In Reason

    As a site that promotes reason, we often find we are against popular public opinions. Even though we are atheists by one definition or another, it is often our fellow atheists we are trying to reason with. There are a lot of common opinions many people hold, and they seem to be ingrained within the

    Reason in the Face of Public Opinion » Davidian » Answers In Reason
    Is The ‘lack of belief’ Definition of Atheism The Most Common One Used? » Answers In Reason

    There are some people that like to claim the lack of belief, or absence of belief, definition of atheism is the most common one. I contest that, whilst it is common on social media due to political parties like the American Atheists and American YouTube shows like The Atheist Experience, it isn't that common outside

    Is The ‘lack of belief’ Definition of Atheism The Most Common One Used? » Davidian » Answers In Reason
    If There’s No Evidence, It Doesn’t Exist » Answers In Reason

    In this article I look at the claim 'something doesn't exist until proven to exist. An argument used by many skeptics and atheists.

    If There’s No Evidence, It Doesn’t Exist » Dave Rowlands » Answers In Reason