All of the
techniques listed in this document have actually
been witnessed, told to us by someone else, or
dreamed up. They are described in first person
for clarity of motive.
The intent of detailing and naming these
insidious tactics is so that the reader may AVOID
USING THEM, to quickly recognize if someone else
is using them, and for fun. There is much humor
in the way people (consciously or unconsciously)
conversationally cheat.
It is hoped that exposing these tactics will help
muzzle the growing abuse in our conversational
landscape. Give copies to both perpetrators and
victims (only NOT for profit use).
The examples are overblown in an attempt to be
both clear and funny. Use your imagination to
think of how you (perish the thought) and others
have used these techniques in the past.
They have been grouped by major category, with
the best (worst!) saved for last.
First, we have the Ad Hominem Variants where you
attack the person as a way to avoid truth,
science, or logic which might otherwise prove you
wrong. Next are the Sleight
of Mind Fallacies , which act
as "mental magic" to make sure the
unwanted subject disappears. Then, we move on to Delay Tactics General
Cheap-Shot Tactics and Irritants , which are
basically "below the belt" punches.
Ad Hominem Variants
OVER YOUR HEAD:
"I'd like to respond to that,
but taking into account your background,
education, and intelligence, I am quite sure that
you would not be able to understand."
EVEN YOU:
"My next point will be so
cogent that even you will be able to understand
it."
"Even you should be able to
grasp the next point."
YOU'LL GET OVER IT:
"I used to think that way when
I was your age."
"As you mature emotionally (or
mentally, or spiritually), you will grow out of
your present way of thinking, and you will
eventually come around to my point of view."
"You're new here, aren't
you?"
WISHFUL THINKING:
Instead of proving a point true or
false, this technique tries to imply that the
individual's desires have led him/her astray without
dealing with the merits of the issue itself. (C.S.
Lewis termed this "Bulverism".) Any strong
desire can be shown to have tainted a conclusion or
clouded objectivity, which casts doubt on the
legitimacy of a point. This is very close to the
classic ad hominem fallacy: "you say that
because you are a man."
"You support capital punishment
because of a deep-rooted death wish common among
those who have suffered emotional traumas during
childhood."
"You oppose capital punishment
because of an irrational suppressed death taboo
common among those who have suffered emotional
trauma during childhood."
"You weren't breast fed as a
child, were you?"
Sleight of Mind Fallacies
NIT-PICKING:
Instead of dealing with a comment or
question directly, the idea here is to focus on some
insignificant detail to evade the issue or buy time
to think.
"We need to define just exactly
what you mean by _________."
"Your last sentence ended with
a preposition. Please restate it properly."
OUT OF CONTEXT:
A twisted version of NIT-PICKING, the
technique here is to purposely misunderstand some
word, phrase, or analogy and shift the focus to it
instead of the subject. This ploy will derail the
other person into a defense of the word, phrase, or
analogy instead of the case at hand.
"You said 'feel' instead of
'think'. If you are feeling instead of thinking,
I won't be able to convince you with
reason."
"You said this happened five
years before Hitler came to power. Why are you so
fascinated with Hitler? Are you
anti-Semitic?"
I'M NOT SAYING THIS:
This is a marvelous way to come off as
nice while saying things that would otherwise be
considered rude.
"Have I ever brought up the
$523.52 you owe me? Never! Have I ever
embarrassed you or made you feel bad over it?
Have I ever told you how much I need that money?
No, I never have."
"I don't care if other people
say you're opinionated (or boring or overbearing,
or etc.)"
"I don't want to spend a lot of
time on this, but (blah, blah, blah...)."
"My dear congregation, I hate
to speak of money matters, but (money, money,
money, etc.)."
HEAT-SEEKING QUESTION:
The intent here is to throw the other
person's competence in doubt while at the same time
changing the subject. A question is asked that the
other person is not likely to know the answer to,
destroying their credibility and confidence. To
really rub it in, the questioner can give a full
answer to his/her own question proving that
him/herself to have superior knowledge of the
subject.
"You mentioned the
constitution. Can you quote the preamble for
us?"
"Do you realize which of the
dialectic principles you've just violated?"
[ "No."] "I'd be glad to explain
them to you, but (branch to OVER YOUR
HEAD)."
RIGHT BY ASSOCIATION:
"I have observed that those who
disagree with me on the next point tend to be
unsophisticated, and those who quickly recognize
the validity of the point to be more educated.
The point is...."
"Of course there is a lot of
debate on this subject, but the best scholars
believe..."
CHEAP SHOT:
This technique requires prior knowledge
of some embarrassing mistake or painful event in the
other person's life. This knowledge can be woven into
a comment in a way that agitates the other person
without direct reference. A key word or phrase is
tossed out like a grenade that embarrasses or
humiliates the other person.
"What was it your ex-wife used
to say?"
"Didn't we already have this
argument just before you went through the de-tox
program?"
THE SALESMAN'S CLOSE:
This technique asks an obvious question
and, by playing on a sense of guilt, demands a
predetermined response driven by common sense or
decency. The yes or no response is then implied to
mean a complete agreement with the asker's
point of view.
Family get-together: "Doesn't
your family mean anything to you?"
["Well, yes!"] "Then I will see
you at 10 am."
Support a political movement:
"Do you want communism in America? Is that
what you want?"
Join a Health Spa: "Don't you
care about your own body?"
BOMBAST:
A rhetorical ploy to give more emotional
force to a point or objection than is appropriate.
This requires showmanship and involves risk, but when
it works it can be quite effective. It is useful to
use exaggerated facial expressions and/or pound on
any nearby objects to effectively communicate the
overreaction.
"How DARE you question such an
obvious point?"
"Honestly! You can't REALLY
expect me to believe that?"
THINK VS. FEEL:
A person will likely be off center of
the ANALYTICAL/EMOTIVE SPECTRUM (an alternate name
for this technique) in any heated exchange. By
pointing out which side the other person is on,
(either side will do) he/she is obliged to defend
his/her temperament instead of the case at hand.
"Your cold, analytical approach
to this issue doesn't take into account the human
element."
"Your emotional involvement
with this issue obscures your ability to see
things objectively."
LUNATIC FRINGE:
If a person is making an imaginative or
novel point, the approach here is to push the idea to
a radical extreme generally agreed to be bad. The
extreme can be either real or imagined. The hope here
is that the other person will reflexively back off
and retreat to a defensive position, thus
short-circuiting the progression of the argument.
"So you think we ought to just
throw out the whole system, then?"
"How is that different from
classic fascism?"
"So you would just like to kill
off anyone who disagrees with you, it
appears!"
CUT 'EM OFF AT THE PASS:
If you can see where the other person's
logic is leading, you can make it very difficult
along the way by arguing each minute sub-point and
example. If the other person can not get past the
first point, how will a case ever be made? Most of
the techniques listed can be used to achieve this
end.
"I don't think we can go on
until we establish the scientific validity of
that last statement."
"I don't see any point in
discussing this until all the data are in."
DENIAL OF A VALID CONCLUSION:
This is the opposite of the CUT 'EM OFF
AT THE PASS technique. Instead of arguing along the
way, agree with all of the sub-points but deny the
obvious conclusion. This is very frustrating to the
other person because it automatically changes the
subject to epistemology (how we know what we know).
Generally, the other person will attempt another
explanation rather than get into a heavy
epistemological discussion, and the technique can
simply be repeated.
"I don't see how you figure
that."
"I agree with everything you
said except the conclusion. It doesn't make any
sense to me, and I can not accept it. I am
trying, but your brain must work much differently
than mine."
Delay Tactics
If, when put on the spot to answer a
question or point, you come up blank, then delay
tactics can buy time to dream up a response. These
tactics are risky, because if you are not able to
think of anything clever during the time you buy, you
will be pinned even further.
DESCRIBE THE ANSWER:
Give descriptive attributes of the
eventual answer, then pause as if expecting a
response, while thinking of a real answer. When this
technique is repeated the other person will appear to
be begging you to give an answer.
"I think the answer to your
last question will clear up your confusion on
this subject. (Long pause) Are you ready?"
"Excellent question, and I
think the answer will startle you." (Pause,
look thoughtfully as if a response is due while
thinking up an answer.)
"I'm glad you asked. Would you
like a long or a short answer?"
DESCRIBE THE QUESTION:
Same as above, only here the
diversionary shift of focus is on the question.
"This question could only come
from the confusion of the ______ mind-set."
"That is an interesting
question coming from you. Interesting,
interesting, interesting." (Pause, as if
admiring the other person. )
"The question asked, is
basically _______, ________, _______."
(Restate the questions in various ways, pausing
for approval between each, while thinking up an
answer.)
QUESTION THE QUESTION / COMMENT:
A great lead-in for the technique of
WISHFUL THINKING, or a method of delay giving
yourself time to think of an answer.
"Why do you ask that?" /
"What makes you ask that?"
"What drives you to make such a
statement?"
BRAIN SEIZURE:
A complex statement that paralyzes the
brain.
"What you inferred is not what
you implied."
"Your problem is that you are
thinking in a linear versus configurational
framework."
"I'm not sure if I fail to
disagree with that or not."
WORD SALAD, a.k.a.
SESQUIPEDALIANISM:
This is a recipe for sophisticated
babbling. Ingredients include: philosophic sounding
words and sentence structure, unintelligible Latin
terms, banal folk wisdom, jargon, catch phrases,
truisms, etc. Sprinkle lightly with a few words that
appear to pertain to the subject. This will sound
very impressive without really saying anything and
will buy time to think of something meaty to say
while your lips are flapping. In some circles such
machinations can actually be passed off as an answer--or
a point!
"In view of the federal budget
deficit, civil unrest, and international
politics, we need to consider that,
notwithstanding the mitigating circumstances,
this country has got to get back on its feet.
Don't you agree?"
REVERSE THE QUESTION:
Echo the question back or ask the other
person a similar or difficult question. (This can be
a valid technique if not used merely as a delay
tactic.)
"What do you think the answer
to your question is?"
"How 'bout if I ask you a
similar question?"
START A STORY:
With a sparkle in your eye, start into a
long-winded story which presumes to apply to the
subject at hand. Continue until the other person
calls your bluff, then act insulted and claim that
you are not getting equal time or a fair chance to
explain you case. Then, thoroughly offended, drop the
cover story and start with the real answer (whatever
it was you were able to think of while you were
babbling).
"This reminds me of the time I
was in Cucamonga. Let me tell you, it was hot!
(Time to think up real answer during dramatic
pauses) And we were in a small hotel when a gas
leak started. Well! You can imagine how
we...."
OBVIOUS ANSWER:
To give an obvious, over-literal,
useless, or pun response to delay with humor.
["What is your first
point?"] "My first point is point
#1."
[How do you explain the difference
between salaries of men and women in this company
who are perfoming the exact same jobs?] "I'm
not sure, but I think it has something to do with
gender."
Question As Opportunity
A standard response for politicians is to view
any question as an opportunity to say whatever they
want. The "answer" does not have to have
anything to do with the "question" asked.
This practice has all but killed the utility of
debate and dialog in politics and, unhappily, it is
spreading to other areas of life as well. Following
are some inconspicuous techniques that allow a deft
shift from the question subject to the desired
subject.
"THIS OR THAT":
Deny that the issue is limited to the
question at hand. Redefine the issue to your favorite
topic.
"It is not a question of (this)
or (that), but rather it is an issue of (whatever
it is you want to say.)"
["Are you for or against
capital punishment?"] "I don't think
the issue is being for or against capital
punishment. The real issue facing our country is
the federal budget deficit. I propose that we....
"
"X IS ONE ISSUE, Y IS
ANOTHER":
Acknowledges the issue and quickly
changes to a new subject.
"X is certainly one topic that
could be discussed, but Y is another..."
"Well, my track record is
certainly one issue, but this month's agenda is
another. Do you know that in the next five
days...."
General Cheap Shot Tactics and
Irritants
HYPOTHETICAL INSULT:
"Take this example: suppose you
were a person who was incredibly stupid but was
trying to come off as intelligent. What would the
proper response be if you were me?"
"Let's just say that we knew
for sure that you were a sexual pervert...."
COMPLIMENTARY INSULT:
"Why, that is a brilliant
question coming from you!"
"You're looking less repulsive
than usual today."
"Who would have thought you had
it in you?"
DISTORTED ACTIVE LISTENING:
Active listening is where you parrot
back what the other person is saying in order to draw
them out and to keep them talking. DISTORTED ACTIVE
LISTENING parrots back what the other person is
saying, but gets it all wrong or makes it sound
incredibly stupid. Similar to LUNATIC FRINGE.
"If I hear you correctly, your
point is... (get it all wrong)."
"It sounds as if you are saying
that torturing children is a good idea...."
NAME IT:
To the feebleminded, if there is a NAME
used as a label for IT, then it must be
wrong, even if it isn't. The NAME, now a
"proof" of sorts, can be used as a
sledgehammer if IT comes up again.
"The case you just made was
first made by Edgar Sullivan in the late 1800s
and was quickly disproved. The 'Sullivan Error'
inevitably occurs to people when they first start
studying the subject."
"Your line of reasoning is
called the MacGregor Phenomenon."
"Why, that's Calvinism!"
I KNOW BETTER:
A clever and socially acceptable way of
denying what someone has said by claiming to know
more about what the other person thinks or feels than
they do. Believe it or not, this technique is quite
commonplace and effective.
"That's a cruel thing to say,
and I know you don't mean it."
"You've made that point well,
but ... (1) I know where your heart is; (2) I
sense that you're not comfortable with what
you're saying; (3) I know what kind of person you
are deep down ... and that you cannot continue to
hold this position and maintain your
integrity."
"Johnny, the reason I can't
give you permission to go to the party is because
I know that deep in your heart you'd rather spend
the time here with me."
SELECTIVE MEMORY:
To bring up a past event and GET IT ALL
WRONG, or even to make up a past event. The intent is
to get the other person confused, angry, and
defensive.
"You never admit defeat.
Remember that chess game I beat you in?"
(The one you lost.)
"But last week (or a minute
ago) you said the opposite! Make up your
mind!"
"Remember last time we had an
argument, and you turned out to be wrong and
wouldn't admit it? Now we're in the same spot we
were last time."
STUDIES HAVE SHOWN:
When all else is lost, refer to a phony
study that supports your case. This is a bet that the
other person will not call your bluff. Does he/she
know for certain the study didn't happen? The usual
response is "I have not seen or heard of this
study", further discrediting the other person as
not doing comprehensive study of available source
material.
"Research at UCLA has proven
conclusively...."
"I know the idea sounds
unorthodox, but a recent study at Harvard has
substantiated this view."
REPEAT OFFENDER, a.k.a. SLOGAN
RESPONSES:
The repeated use of an assertion,
truism, bad joke, or even physical gesture when used
to the point of extreme irritation.
"The customer comes
first!" ["But what about our
profit?"] "The customer comes first!
["But they don't have any money!"]
"The customer... (etc.)."
["What do you think?"]
"It's crazy." (wave arms while stating)
["What is that supposed to mean?"]
(wave arms wildly) ["Huh?"] (repeat as
necessary)
KNEE JERK:
"I would like to answer your
question directly, but considering your past
reactions / ability to cope with the truth /
emotional instability, I feel that to do so would
be a disservice to you at this time." [Other
person gets (justifiably) upset.] "See, what
did I tell you. You are flying off the handle
already!"
LOOK AT YOU:
After using any of the previous ploys,
point out any physical manifestations of the other
person's irritation as further proof that they are
wrong.
"You seem to be sweating a lot.
Of course, I would be too if I had to try to
support your flimsy position."
"Why look, your lips are
quivering. You have a hard time admitting defeat,
don't you?"
SELECTIVE QUOTATION:
Use an actual, fabricated, or
hypothetical statement from some universally credible
source.
"What would your father say if
he could hear you now?"
"As it says in the Bible: 'God
helps those who help themselves'."
"If Albert Einstein were here I
think he would agree with me. Didn't he once say
'If an idea does not at first seem absurd, it is
probably incorrect'?"
FAST ANSWER:
The technique here is to answer so
quickly or in such detail that no one could ever
doubt the response.
["Do you really think that
anyone else agrees with this crazy idea?"]
"52.359% of Americans surveyed agreed."
YOU'LL PAY FOR THAT:
If proven wrong or corrected in any way
that you do not like, revenge is the answer
here. This can be accomplished by throwing a fit,
glowering at the person with a death stare,
complete withdrawal or pregnant silence, or some
other form of dramatic emotional blackmail as
manipulation. The idea is to train people
not to correct you in the future by making them pay
dearly for correcting you now. Also known as the THAT
WILL TEACH YOU technique and/or THE ESCALATION PLOY.
"If you're going to be that way
about it, then...."
"You don't love me
(sob!)."
PRETEND AD HOMINEM:
A specific escalation of YOU'LL PAY FOR
THAT; make it seem as if the other person is
attacking you rather than making a simple
point or correction, especially if you suspect that
the other party is correct. Rather than staying on
the subject, begin to act hurt--as if you have been
viciously attacked as a human being--rather than
admit you are wrong, or could do better, etc.
"I can't do anything
right..."
"I suppose in your eyes I am
just a total failure."
["I think the reason people are
honking and gesticulating at you is that the sign
says MERGE, not STOP."] "Well, if you
think me such a terrible, horrible
person...."
LISTEN UP:
Pretend that the reason the other person
isn't able to agree with you is that they are not
listening, or at least not hard enough.
"If you'd just listen you'd
have heard me the first time when I said
that...."
"Since you obviously weren't
listening when I said this before, I'm forced to
repeat myself."
FILIBUSTER:
To take an extraordinary amount of time
or go to great technical depth to wear out the other
person and get time on your side. The other person is
pushed to give up and agree with you rather than
endure the torture of hearing you go through another
sincere, long-winded answer.
"Since you are a true
intellectual, I will have to give you a more
comprehensive answer than most... Blah, Blah,
Blah... (use WORD SALAD technique).
"Now that I have answered your
point, do you have any other concerns?"
(Repeat until the other person collapses or gives
in.)
