Retorsion is a method of proof in which the explicitly expressed is refuted by the implicit conditions of the act of utterance. If an explicit (thematic) statement contradicts the implicit (non-thematic) condition of the statement of expression, then it contradicts itself. Such a contradiction in scholasticism is called a contradiction in execution (contradictio exercita). According to E. Koret, retorsion is the main element of transcendental , especially metaphysical thinking. Retorsion as a metaphysical method of proof is opposed to formal logical methods, which, being abstract and limited, not taking into account the real event of the act of utterance (and therefore not being able to grasp non-thematically related knowledge in it), do not come close to the reality of being [1 ] .
Aristotle also used retorsion as a method of proof to substantiate the law of contradiction (the denial of this law contradicts itself in the execution of the statement) [1] .
In jurisprudence, retorsion refers to the response of the state to discriminatory actions of another state.
According to the dictionary of foreign words, retortion is understood as a way to refute the enemy with his own arguments [2] .