Bad argument techniques are not necessarily bad faith arguments.
For example saying “broccoli is bad because I don’t like it” isn’t necessarily bad faith, it’s just poorly reasoned and doesn’t consider other perspectives and ideas. If the arguer is willing to listen to other perspectives and ideas and is willing to revise their statement to better reflect reality to something like “broccoli is not for me, because I don’t like broccoli but other people do.”
Bad faith argumentation doesn’t try to consider other ideas and perspectives and will do everything they can to avoid conceding anything to the opposing arguments, and will continue to adhere to the original despite evidence to the contrary.
Both can use bad argumentation, but good faith argumentation reflects a willingness to adapt to new information, and bad faith will only double down on their argument despite evidence to the contrary.
Bad argument techniques are not necessarily bad faith arguments.
For example saying “broccoli is bad because I don’t like it” isn’t necessarily bad faith, it’s just poorly reasoned and doesn’t consider other perspectives and ideas. If the arguer is willing to listen to other perspectives and ideas and is willing to revise their statement to better reflect reality to something like “broccoli is not for me, because I don’t like broccoli but other people do.”
Bad faith argumentation doesn’t try to consider other ideas and perspectives and will do everything they can to avoid conceding anything to the opposing arguments, and will continue to adhere to the original despite evidence to the contrary.
Both can use bad argumentation, but good faith argumentation reflects a willingness to adapt to new information, and bad faith will only double down on their argument despite evidence to the contrary.