WBUR⁠9%

Kurt Gödel was famous for unraveling the mysteries of math. He also might have identified a loophole in the U.S. Constitution. ⁠83%

By Grace Tatter⁠0% Ben Brock Johnson⁠0% Amory Sivertson⁠0% Paul Vaitkus⁠0%

7/23/2026, 11:00:38 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 18 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority, Bandwagon, and Attempt to Sell a Product or Service, with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 47.6% saturation with 101 hits. Analysis detected 619 faulty-reasoning hits from 212 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 74.7% and a BS Rank of ⁠83% (3,785 of 21,887 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 82.70% of the article peer group.

Kurt Gödel was a genius mathematician and logician, considered by many scholars to be as influential as Aristotle. 
He was also buddies with fellow geniuses Albert Einstein and Oskar Morgenstern, the co-creator of Game Theory. 
In 1947, Gödel told Morgenstern and Einstein he had identified an inner contradiction in the U.S. 
Constitution while studying for his citizenship test: the type of loophole that could plunge the United States into a dictatorship not unlike the Nazi regime Gödel had escaped when he immigrated from Austria. 
So, what was the loophole? 
Over the years, everyone from Constitutional law scholars to laypeople on Reddit have wondered. 
Endless Thread plumbs the depths of Gödel's galaxy brain with the help of philosopher, writer and Gödel expert Rebecca Newberger Goldstein — and learns some surprising lessons about artificial intelligence, a German shorthand called Gabelsberger, and democracy along the way. 
Show notes: 
* *Incompleteness: The Proof and Paradox of Kurt Gödel*, by Rebecca Newberger Goldstein (Amazon) 
* Oskar Morgenstern's account of Kurt Gödel's naturalization (Institute of Advanced Study) 
The following documents are from the the Shelby White and Leon Levy Archives Center, Institute for Advanced Study (Princeton, N.J.) 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Grace Tatter: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 2.4%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Grace Tatter: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 0.5%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 14.2%Grace Tatter: 9.9%Cognoscenti: 2.3%Availability Heuristic14.2%This article: 0.0%Grace Tatter: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 0.7%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Grace Tatter: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 0.5%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Grace Tatter: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 1.4%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 4.7%Grace Tatter: 6.8%Cognoscenti: 3.9%Framing Effect4.7%This article: 0.0%Grace Tatter: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 0.8%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Grace Tatter: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 0.5%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Grace Tatter: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 4.7%Grace Tatter: 7.9%Cognoscenti: 3.4%Optimism Bias4.7%This article: 15.6%Grace Tatter: 5.2%Cognoscenti: 0.7%Pessimism Bias15.6%This article: 15.6%Grace Tatter: 10.4%Cognoscenti: 5.0%Negativity Bias15.6%This article: 0.0%Grace Tatter: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 1.1%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Grace Tatter: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 0.6%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Grace Tatter: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 6.6%Grace Tatter: 2.2%Cognoscenti: 0.7%In-Group Bias6.6%This article: 0.0%Grace Tatter: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 0.1%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 16.5%Grace Tatter: 24.4%Cognoscenti: 2.0%Halo Effect16.5%This article: 0.0%Grace Tatter: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Grace Tatter: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Grace Tatter: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 0.9%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Grace Tatter: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 0.2%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Grace Tatter: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Grace Tatter: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 0.4%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 2.4%Grace Tatter: 0.8%Cognoscenti: 0.3%Straw Man2.4%This article: 44.8%Grace Tatter: 29.4%Cognoscenti: 2.6%Appeal to Authority44.8%This article: 0.0%Grace Tatter: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 1.7%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 15.6%Grace Tatter: 15.6%Cognoscenti: 0.3%Slippery Slope15.6%This article: 0.0%Grace Tatter: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 6.6%Grace Tatter: 4.4%Cognoscenti: 3.5%Hasty Generalization6.6%This article: 0.0%Grace Tatter: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 25.5%Grace Tatter: 15.7%Cognoscenti: 0.6%Bandwagon25.5%This article: 15.6%Grace Tatter: 10.4%Cognoscenti: 5.4%Appeal to Emotion15.6%This article: 0.0%Grace Tatter: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 0.5%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 15.6%Grace Tatter: 5.2%Cognoscenti: 2.0%Post Hoc (False Cause)15.6%This article: 0.0%Grace Tatter: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Grace Tatter: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 0.4%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Grace Tatter: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Grace Tatter: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 7.5%Grace Tatter: 2.5%Cognoscenti: 2.3%Anecdotal7.5%This article: 0.0%Grace Tatter: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Grace Tatter: 1.6%Cognoscenti: 0.7%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Grace Tatter: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Grace Tatter: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Grace Tatter: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Grace Tatter: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 0.0%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Grace Tatter: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 0.0%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 7.5%Grace Tatter: 2.5%Cognoscenti: 0.9%Unattributed Quote7.5%This article: 0.0%Grace Tatter: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 0.6%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 47.6%Grace Tatter: 33.0%Cognoscenti: 3.0%Biased Writer Voice47.6%This article: 0.0%Grace Tatter: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 1.4%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Grace Tatter: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 0.8%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Grace Tatter: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 0.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 25.5%Grace Tatter: 17.0%Cognoscenti: 1.2%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…25.5%

212 words analyzed.

Speakers

No attributed speakers were identified in this analysis.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.