Weasel Words
It's hard going to work every day, the modern curse of the hunter-gatherer. It is even worse when you have a bad boss. Take Biff, for example. While Biff is at work in his cubicle, his boss appears. Not known for cordiality, the boss locks eyes with Biff and, in a cold, severe tone, says:
“Are you actually going to finish the report on time this week, or are you going to wait until the very last minute?”
The flummoxed Biff finds himself in a no-win situation. Just saying anything validates the fault-finding his boss has thoughtfully provided. If Biff says the report is late, he confirms his boss’s accusation. On the other hand, if he says the report is on time, the assumption that he could have easily waited until the last minute stands.
This tactic is called the loaded gun fallacy (or the presupposition fallacy). In the guise of a question, you are handed a syntactic loaded weapon cocked and ready to go off with the slightest touch. The subject of the dialog has been subvertedly established, and no amount of denials can alter this foundation.
Sometimes, inserting sub rosa topics is more subtle. Consider this example: A politician is fielding a news conference. It is to explain the latest budget, a dry analysis which may require curtailing some trash collection. At the conference, a reporter takes the opportunity to ask this loaded question:
“Why are you threatening to stop trash collection?”
The politician is surprised, and as intended by the reporter, successfully sandbagged. The word "threatening" is the primary culprit. It assumes the politician’s motive is to punish or intimidate the public rather than to reallocate funds or increase efficiency. Also notice that stop is substituted for curtail, a calculated distortion to maximize conflict. Variants of this tactic occur all the time in the news cycles and hard to ignore once you are tuned in to them.
As you can see, this tactic has many possibilities. If you are dealing with someone who is less than honest, you have to listen carefully for any weasel words that may be inserted. Once identified, neutralize them by rephrasing the question in your response, thus letting the assertions fade away.
If the politician above is skilled, she’ll concentrate on the positives of her proposal. Her measured responses will imply that the future of the city is more important than a tug-of-war with a reporter. Yes, policy announcements aren’t particularly inspirational, but by evading loaded assertions, they are preferable.
If some of this seems familiar to my blog readers, it is. Like the Ad Hominem Guide, a negative characteristic is foisted on you. But rather than the obvious and combative insult, the loaded gun fallacy is the ultimate in passive-aggressive behavior. Hiding in the dense syntactical forest of the sentence, the affront slips right in and does its damage, many times without the victim knowing exactly what is happening. But if you do catch it, don’t let the unwanted assertion stand. Remember, you are a participant in the conversation; ensure the topic is one you actually want to discuss.
