Logical Persuasion Techniques
Techniques based on logical reasoning, argumentation, and evidence presentation. Includes both valid reasoning strategies and common logical fallacies used persuasively.
20 techniques in this category
Tu Quoque
Deflecting criticism by pointing out that the critic has done the same thing, without actually addressing whether the criticism is valid.
Genetic Fallacy
Judging the truth or value of an argument based on its origin rather than its actual content, evidence, or logical structure.
Equivocation
Using a word or phrase with multiple meanings in different parts of an argument, creating the illusion of logical connection where none exists.
Begging the Question
An argument where the conclusion is assumed in one of the premises, creating a circular logic that proves nothing.
Appeal to Ignorance
Claiming that something is true because it hasn't been proven false, or false because it hasn't been proven true.
Hasty Generalization
Drawing broad conclusions from a small, unrepresentative sample — assuming what's true of a few cases is true in general.
Composition/Division Fallacy
Assuming that what is true of the parts must be true of the whole (composition), or what is true of the whole must be true of each part (division).
Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc
Assuming that because one event followed another, the first event caused the second — confusing sequence with causation.
No True Scotsman
Protecting a universal claim by dismissing counterexamples as not being "true" members of the group — retroactively redefining the category to exclude inconvenient evidence.
Circular Reasoning
An argument structure where the conclusion is used as one of its own premises, creating a loop that proves nothing.
Appeal to Consequences
Arguing that something must be true (or false) because the consequences of it being true would be desirable (or undesirable).
Burden of Proof Shifting
Demanding that others disprove your unsubstantiated claim rather than providing evidence for it yourself.
Middle Ground Fallacy
Assuming that the truth must lie between two opposing positions — that compromise is inherently correct regardless of the merits of each position.
Nirvana Fallacy
Rejecting practical solutions because they are not perfect — comparing real options against an unattainable ideal to make them seem inadequate.
Texas Sharpshooter
Cherry-picking data clusters after the fact to create the appearance of a meaningful pattern — like painting a target around bullet holes.
Gish Gallop
Overwhelming an opponent with a rapid series of many weak or dubious arguments, making it impossible to adequately address each one.
Motte and Bailey
Defending a controversial position (the bailey) by retreating to a much more defensible position (the motte) when challenged, then returning to the controversial position once pressure subsides.
Kafka Trap
A rhetorical trap where any denial of guilt is used as further evidence of guilt, making the accusation unfalsifiable.
Thought-Terminating Cliche
Using stock phrases and platitudes to shut down critical thinking and end uncomfortable lines of inquiry without actually addressing them.
Special Pleading
Applying rules, standards, or criticism to others while claiming an exemption for yourself without adequate justification.