Neo-Obscurantism Unmasked

Argument mimicry

Argument mimicry is the tactic of disqualifying an critical argument against the mainstream narrative by associating it with a similar but blatantly flawed version of the same argument, in order to reject the first together with the second.
When an argument that debunks the official version on some issue becomes too widespread, mainstream "debunkers" counter this by ironically making up a blatantly fallacious argument that superficially seems to have the same logic, but is actually very different, or is used in an improper manner or context, then by treating the 2 as if they were perfectly equivalent. In this way people will be tricked into considering the original argument as inherently invalid, by false analogy.
A variant of the same tactic consists in having fake dissenters (see "Controlled opposition") making similar kind of blatantly flawed reasoning against the mainstream, but pretending to do it in a completely serious way; giving the opportunity to come in an debunk the reasoning and, with it, also any similar argument that might be used to criticize the mainstream. This also serves the additional purpose of blackwashing alternative researchers as incompetent or "crackpots".

Examples:
Critical argument: A photo/video is recognized as a fake on the basis of really clear evidences of manipulation.
Argument mimicry: Call a photo/video fake on the basis of some extremely weak evidence of manipulation.
Implied message: Analyzing photos/videos in order to find evidences of manipulation is retarded.

Critical argument: An event or phenomenon presents a lot of striking coincidences that clearly point in the direction of a conspiration and are hardly explainable in any other way.
Argument mimicry: Calling an event/phenomenon a conspiracy on the basis of a few very forced and indirect coincidences that are easily explainable in lots of different ways.
Implied message: All coincidences are normal and trying to explain them is inherently irrational.

Critical argument: Asking the proofs for the non-existence of a phenomenon with countless evidences of its reality.
Argument mimicry: Asking for proofs about the non-existence of some unheard fantastic thing that's blatantly made-up on the spot.
Implied message: Everything can be denied without proofs.

Return