A Communication Anitpattern: the illogical conclusion

To understand this post, you'll first need to understand what I mean by an antipattern. Briefly, the idea comes from design patterns in software development; a pattern is a good idea that is reused in various contexts. The idea of "antipatterns" came up in the context of discussing bad ideas that are also reused, and found to be wanting for some reason.

Extending this beyond computers, I see this communication antipattern regularly, both at home and at work. Here's a sample script:
me: We should spend a little time doing team-building activities.

$boss: But if we spend all our time doing team-building activites, we'll never get anything done!

me: I'm certainly not advocating that we convene work every morning at the video game arcade. Of course we need to get work done. However I think that a little time spent learning to work together would pay off in the long run.

$boss: [changes subject]
Broken down into its basic form, it looks like this:
Player A: Suggests X.

Player B: Considers proposition X in absurd context (e.g. done to the exclusion of other activities, done without regard for local and/or natural laws, etc.)

Player A: Makes obvious clarification to X.

Player B: [further evasions]
Since Player B takes A's ostensibly reasonable statement to its illogical conclusion, I think of this as the "illogical conclusion" antipattern. In a less charitable moment, I might characterize this as a dishonest maneuver made by someone who not only:
  1. wishes to avoid talking about X, but
  2. wishes to avoid talking about their avoidance to avoid talking about X
These goals are accomplished by suggesting that Player A is being unreasonable.

Here's another concrete example (paraphrased):
Me: So, what's the plan for [new VP at $work] when he starts?

$boss: Come on, it's not reasonable to expect him to have everything he's going to do planned out to the last minute.

Me: Um, I was thinking a little more generally than that. What projects is he going to be working on?

$boss: [evasion]
I'm really not sure what the right response is to this. Do these people really think I'm suggesting that we turn every workday into a nonstop party? Or that I think anyone has their first week at a new job planned out to the last minute?

Here are some options I'm considering:
  1. Really? I think it's totally reasonable to spend all day at the bar with my coworkers. Think outside the box, man!
  2. [stunned silence]
  3. Hand them a copy of this blog post.
No matter how you slice it, this is a bizarre pattern of (mis-) communication.

Comments

Unknown said…
With "illogical conclusion" you've come up with another name for the classic "straw man" argument:

"The Straw Man fallacy is committed when a person simply ignores a person's actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented version of that position."

-- Straw Man Fallacy

Having done that, the person refutes the exaggerated position and falsely concludes that the actual position has been refuted.

I like your labeling of logical fallacies as "communication antipatterns" though. :)
John Trammell said…
Excellent observation. How did I not recognize this as classic Straw Man?