Speaker summary
⁠59%1 analyzed article/video110.333 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Patrick Schlesser results contain 8 faulty reasoning types, including Burden of Proof, Fundamental Attribution Error, and Framing Effect, with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 66.7% saturation with 110 hits. Analysis detected 428.033 faulty-reasoning hits from 110.333 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 36.6% and a BS Rank of ⁠55% (12,777 of 28,364 speakers). This Patrick Schlesser is worse (more manipulative) than 55.00% of the peer group.
Patrick Schlesser
Speaker details
Total words: 110.333
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

55% percentile
025507510055.0% percentile
36.6% BS Score1 analyzed videos110.3 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–75%
0.0%20%40%60%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 66.7%66.7%Burden of ProofSitewide 0.4%Speaker 49.7%49.7%Ad HominemSitewide 2.2%Speaker 49.4%49.4%Fundamental Attribution E…Sitewide 2.7%Speaker 49.7%49.7%Special PleadingSitewide 0.3%Speaker 24.9%24.9%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Speaker 37.1%37.1%Begging the QuestionSitewide 1.7%Speaker 7.9%7.9%Overconfidence BiasSitewide 4.6%Speaker 7.9%7.9%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%20%20%40%40%60%60%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 66.7%, sitewide 15.9%Burden of Proof: Speaker 49.7%, sitewide 0.4%Fundamental Attribution Error: Speaker 49.7%, sitewide 2.7%Ad Hominem: Speaker 49.4%, sitewide 2.2%Framing Effect: Speaker 37.1%, sitewide 26.9%Special Pleading: Speaker 24.9%, sitewide 0.3%Begging the Question: Speaker 7.9%, sitewide 1.7%Overconfidence Bias: Speaker 7.9%, sitewide 4.6%Appeal to EmotionSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos