Motte-And-Bailey Fallacy
From Design+Encyclopedia, the free encyclopedia on good design, art, architecture, creativity, engineering and innovation.
Motte-And-Bailey Fallacy
The Motte-And-Bailey Fallacy is a type of argumentation that involves making a bold and controversial statement, but then retreating to a weaker and more defensible position when challenged. The fallacy is named after the medieval fortifications of motte-and-bailey castles, where the motte (a raised mound) was the strong and defensible position, while the bailey (an enclosed courtyard) was the weaker and more vulnerable position. In the same way, the arguer uses a strong and controversial claim (the motte) to attract attention and create an impression of strength, but then retreats to a weaker and more defensible position (the bailey) when challenged. The Motte-And-Bailey Fallacy is a type of bait-and-switch tactic that is often used in debates, discussions, and political discourse. It is a form of deception that is used to create the impression that the arguer's original claim is true, when in fact it is not. By retreating to a weaker position, the arguer can avoid having to defend their original claim and can instead focus on defending a more defensible position. The fallacy is often used by politicians, activists, and ideologues who want to push a particular agenda or ideology. By using a strong and controversial claim to attract attention and create a sense of urgency, they can then retreat to a more defensible position when challenged. This allows them to avoid having to defend their original claim and instead focus on defending a more moderate or reasonable position. In conclusion, the Motte-And-Bailey Fallacy is a type of argumentation that involves making a bold and controversial claim, but then retreating to a weaker and more defensible position when challenged. It is a form of deception that is often used in debates and political discourse to create the impression that the arguer's original claim is true, when in fact it is not. By being aware of this fallacy, we can avoid being misled by deceptive arguments and can instead focus on evaluating claims based on their merits.
Motte-And-Bailey Fallacy, argumentation, deception, politics, ideology
Motte-And-Bailey Fallacy
The Motte-And-Bailey Fallacy is a type of thinking that can lead to incorrect conclusions. It happens when someone makes a claim that is easy to defend, but then when challenged, they change their argument to something they can prove better. This can result in a situation where the person doesn't have to back up any of their claims. It's important to be aware of this type of fallacy so that we can make sure we are thinking about our opinions in a logical and reasonable way.
Motte-And-Bailey Fallacy, Cognitive Bias, Logical Fallacy, Argumentation.
CITATION : "Thomas Lee. 'Motte-And-Bailey Fallacy.' Design+Encyclopedia. https://design-encyclopedia.com/define/motte-and-bailey-fallacy?E=214431 (Accessed on October 14, 2026)"
Motte-And-Bailey Fallacy
Motte-And-Bailey Fallacy, also known as a “Trojan Horse” argument, is a cognitive bias and logical fallacy that is used to rationalise a position. It involves making a bold and confident statement and then, when challenged, retreating to a weaker position, which is easier to defend. This tactic is used to create the impression that the arguer's original statement is true, when in fact it is not. This form of argumentation is often used in debates or conversations to create a false sense of validity for the arguer's position. It is a type of psychological manipulation that is used to deceive or mislead the listener or reader.
Motte-And-Bailey Fallacy, Cognitive Biases, Logical Fallacies, Argumentation, Debate, Manipulation
Motte-And-Bailey Fallacy on Design+Encyclopedia
We have 220,822 Topics and 478,829 Entries and Motte-And-Bailey Fallacy has 3 entries on Design+Encyclopedia. Design+Encyclopedia is a free encyclopedia, written collaboratively by designers, creators, artists, innovators and architects. Become a contributor and expand our knowledge on Motte-And-Bailey Fallacy today.