Special Pleading
What it is
Applying rules, standards, or criticism to others while claiming an exemption for yourself without adequate justification.
How it works
Real-world examples
- •A politician demanding transparency from opponents while refusing to release their own records due to "special circumstances."
- •"I know I said no exceptions, but my case is genuinely different because..."
- •A company demanding strict contract compliance from vendors while routinely violating their own contractual obligations.
Ethical guidelines
- ●Standards have value only if they apply equally — exemptions require genuine, verifiable justification.
- ●If your exception would be unacceptable if someone else claimed it, it's probably unjustified.
- ●Consistent application of principles is the foundation of fairness.
How to defend against it
- ►Apply the reversal test: "Would you accept this exception if the other party claimed it?"
- ►Demand specific, verifiable reasons for the exception — not vague appeals to special circumstances.
- ►Establish principles before specific cases arise, reducing the opportunity for post-hoc exemptions.
From the Defense Playbook
Before defending a belief, write down the specific evidence that would make you abandon it, which turns the belief into a testable claim and exposes positions (yours or a persuader's) that nothing could ever dislodge.
Before you publish, present, or press an argument, go through it as a hostile reader would, looking for the fallacies and statistical shortcuts you would attack in an opponent, and fix or cut what you find.
Before arguing over who is right, ask what observation would count against the claim, and agree on it in advance; a claim that no possible evidence could count against is not being offered as a claim about the world.
Every playbook entry states how strong its evidence is and when not to use it. Browse the full playbook.
References
- Batson, C. D., Thompson, E. R., Seuferling, G., Whitney, H., & Strongman, J. A. (1999). Moral hypocrisy: Appearing moral to oneself without being so. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(3), 525–537Experiments on moral hypocrisy: people endorse a fairness rule and then exempt themselves from it when self-interest is at stake — the entry's 'the rules apply to everyone except me'.
- Valdesolo, P., & DeSteno, D. (2007). Moral hypocrisy: Social groups and the flexibility of virtue. Psychological Science, 18(8), 689–690Shows the same transgression is judged more leniently when committed by oneself or one's group than by others — the double standard the entry describes, and why the justification offered tends to be vague or circular.