The Port-Royal Logic stigmatizes the technique of the inventio as stimulating the “noxious fertility of common thoughts” (Arnauld and Nicole [1662], p. 235). The same criticism applies to the techniques of elocutio, which stimulates and extolls the abundance of words (copia verborum) S. Ornamental, producing a verbose and redundant discourse:

Among the causes which lead us into error, by a false luster, which prevent our recognizing it, we may justly reckon a certain grand and pompous eloquence. […] for it is wonderful how sweetly a false reasoning flows in at the close of a period which well fits the ear, or of a figure which surprises us by its novelty, and in the contemplation of which we are delighted. (Id., p. 279)

The condemnation of the techniques stimulating the abundance of ideas as well as the abundance of words amounts to a general condemnation of rhetoric, as inherently fallacious. Cicero defines eloquence as copia verborum; that is eloquence; the rejection of eloquence, re-named verbiage to stigmatize its negative orientation, is a turning point in the relations between rhetoric and logic as a criticism of discourse. This fallacy of verbiage is, as it were, the mother of all fallacies. According to Whately:

a very long discussion is one of the most effective masks of the fallacies; […] a fallacy, which, asserted without a veil […] would not deceive a child can deceive half the world if it is diluted in a large quarto (Elements of Logic 1844) (quoted by Mackie, 1967, p. 179).

S. Systemic Superfluity Fallacies (1)  — Fallacies (4): A Moral and Anthropological perspective