At work, some people use “it’s a safety hazard” when they want you to do something without asking questions (and aren’t in a position to just give orders). In US culture, “terrorism” is currently used for the same effect.
Is there a term or phrase for statements/arguments/threats like this which are used to instantly suppress debate (as opposed to derailing, abusing or simply stifling it as other bad arguments do)?
Excellent. Also its sniper-like derivative: “Because.”
ETA: Used in Hebrew: “Lamah? Kacha.” Interesting that the Hebrew uses “behold, it is” (roughly) while English uses a different cause,in the Aristotelian sense,which I would cite in scholastic Latin – the terms are bread and butter in the field – if I could remember them.
“Ipse dixit” is you want to sound fancy. I believe in its original meaning it meant that a person was doing something by declaring it with the authority of an office he held. For example, if a monarch declares you’re a knight, then you are indeed a knight - the monarch has the power to make you a knight by saying you are. Or if five members of the Supreme Court declare a law is unconstitutional, then it is - because they made it unconstitutional by saying it was.
But in more common usage (to the degree that ipse dixit has any common usage) it means a person is trying to win an argument by simply saying something and then telling people they’re not allowed to argue with what he said.
I’ve heard that some people use the argument of, “That is a non-normative issue” which I have taken to mean that the whole discussion is based on a hypothetical set of circumstances, so any discussion is a waste of time.
For example, “Abortion is a non-normative issue.” with the idea that we can never know 100% when life begins, so any debate on the issue is a waste of time.
Or if we have souls, or what would you do with a million dollars or if you had one super power, what would it be…
“Axiomatic” is another term used. Sometimes to shut down discussion, sometimes as an acknowledgement that discussion is irrelevant because they aren’t trying to pretend there’s an objective justification in the first place.