Philosophy Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for those interested in the study of the fundamental nature of knowledge, reality, and existence. It only takes a minute to sign up.
Sign up to join this community
Arguments can be won by utilizing a mixture of ethos, pathos, and logos. Logos may either appeal using real logic (facts), or using deceptive logic (non-facts).
What's the term for deceiving people using a combination of pathos and non-factual logos, giving an appearance of solidity to pure wind and making murders respectable?
What's the term for gaining the upper hand by elegantly deceptive manipulations of words and emotions instead of by actual facts and real logic?
As has been pointed out in the comments, the closest correct answer to this question that I'm aware of is "sophistry".
That is, there is no term to my knowledge that is specifically about winning an argument using elegant/deceptive manipulation, but the act itself is known as sophistry. The people who do this are known as sophists.
Being called a sophist wasn't always meant in a negative way, and indeed the original terms referred to people who were simply well-spoken. The word actually comes from Greek σόφισμα, sophisma, from σοφίζω, sophizo "I am wise"[2], but this changed over time.
Owing largely to the influence of Plato and Aristotle, philosophy came to be regarded as distinct from sophistry, the latter being regarded as specious and rhetorical, a practical discipline. Thus, by the time of the Roman Empire, a sophist was simply a teacher of rhetoric and a popular public speaker. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sophism
