Special Pleading
Fallacy Summary: Invent exceptions without justification.
Rules apply to everyone else but are waived for oneself or one’s claim using ad hoc reasons. Research context: Informal-logic and argumentation research treats fallacies as structural problems in reasoning. A conclusion can sound persuasive while still being weak if the link between premises, evidence, and conclusion is not valid. Pattern-specific focus: Invent exceptions without justification. Practical review method: separate factual claims from interpretation, check source quality, and test whether the conclusion survives alternative explanations.
“But if you're going to use it to get illegal aliens that might be committing crimes, apparently to no fault of their own, if you're going to use it to go get them, well, that's just too much.”
Okay for surveillance on citizens but not immigrants, without consistent principle.
How to recognize special pleading yourself
- A rhetorical move replaces proof (for example, popularity, authority, or insult).
- Causation is claimed without ruling out alternatives or coincidence.
- The argument is reduced to an artificial either/or choice.
- Emotion is used to drive agreement where evidence should carry the burden.
Verification questions
- Which premise is doing the critical work, and is it actually supported?
- Does the conclusion logically follow, or does rhetoric bridge the gap?
- What alternative explanation would still fit the observed facts?
Failed to load people summary; Failed to load publications summary; Failed to load article summary
No cohort chart data available.
High offenders
Authors
No offenders available.
Publications
No offenders available.