What is this fallacy?

[swansont]

2 hours ago, koti said:

Normal is subjective, its not ethical for sure but its very common in corporate environments. 

I agree.

It's common where it's tolerated and/or ignored. You need to actively discourage it if it's not to be tolerated.

[YaDinghus]

8 hours ago, Strange said:

Claiming that someone else has responsibility for one's own actions. For example:

• Villain in a movie says, "If you don't pay the ransom / release the prisoners then you will be responsible for the death of the hostages"
• Trump blames the Democrats for his government's actions against immigrants
• Julian Assange is hiding from the law and claims he is being unlawfully detained
• etc

Does this rhetorical tactic have a name?

Hostage situation is pretty much a clear extortion. I guess the common theme with the second example regarding trump is that the party imposing the choice and thereby shifting responsibility is the party in power. I'm not sure how the Assange example fits into this.

I don't know if Circumstantialization is a term, but the first party has either created or found themselves in circumstances where their actions are constrained to few alternatives. The party which they then burden with the choice, and the responsibility for the outcome of the dilemma both parties are facing, is thereby responsible for the outcome of the situation, but only to the extent that they are choosing between two dismal possibilities. The first party however is not exempt from the responsibility of the situation's resolution, because it was them that caused the problem in the first place. The fallacy would be that the party imposing the choice is not at least shared.

I hope this is helpful. I can get quite incoherent when I'm ruminating

 

[koti]

56 minutes ago, swansont said:

I agree.

It's common where it's tolerated and/or ignored. You need to actively discourage it if it's not to be tolerated.

That might be difficult when literally everybody is doing it.

[Strange]

1 minute ago, YaDinghus said:

I'm not sure how the Assange example fits into this

They are all (in my mind) examples where people try to shift the moral responsibility for their actions to someone else. In Assange's case, there is warrant out for his arrest (for jumping ballistic, I think) and so he is hiding from consequences of his actions. He twists this to claim he is being unlawfully detained. 

[mistermack]

I suppose emotional blackmail would be a common phrase for it. 

The threat of suicide is used surprisingly often by manipulative people to get what they want. It's even made official, in cases of women who want an abortion. If they make it clear they are likely to kill themselves, they get what they want. The health professionals don't want the guilt of that on their minds so they recommend that they get it. It's become part of the process now, it's become general knowledge that it works. 

I know a guy who used that same threat to get recommended for a sex change. He underwent it, and is now seriously thinking about trying to get it reversed. Using the same threat again. Life can get incredibly complicated.

[rangerx]

Psychological projection, false equivilence, whataboutism etc., especially in politics fall under the broader term: Gaslighting

[swansont]

12 minutes ago, rangerx said:

Psychological projection, false equivilence, whataboutism etc., especially in politics fall under the broader term: Gaslighting

Gaslighting may be related, since it's manipulation, but is a distinct phenomenon from scapegoating, false equivalence or whataboutism. 

[nevim]

1 hour ago, mistermack said:

I suppose emotional blackmail would be a common phrase for it. 

The threat of suicide is used surprisingly often by manipulative people to get what they want. It's even made official, in cases of women who want an abortion. If they make it clear they are likely to kill themselves, they get what they want. The health professionals don't want the guilt of that on their minds so they recommend that they get it. It's become part of the process now, it's become general knowledge that it works. 

I know a guy who used that same threat to get recommended for a sex change. He underwent it, and is now seriously thinking about trying to get it reversed. Using the same threat again. Life can get incredibly complicated.

Some - 50% maybe - of these people will actually feel that they cannot continue life in the state that they are in. The other -50% maybe - are using manipulation to get what they want. 

I met a woman once who had a paid-by-the-NHS designer vagina. She convinced health professionals that the state of her (then) current one prevented her leaving the house. It wasn’t true. For other people seeking surgery to correct something they really feel they can’t live with is true.

Whatever strategy they all choose to employ (emotional blackmail/pass the buck/scapegoat, honesty), still (IMO), highlight that all of them, honest or dishonest, are somewhat mentally ill.

 

Perhaps I should phrase it differently - they all need help.

 

Edited June 18, 2018 by nevim

[John Cuthber]

11 hours ago, Strange said:

Does this rhetorical tactic have a name?

Lying.

[nevim]

8 minutes ago, John Cuthber said:

Lying.

 absofuckinglutely

[John Cuthber]

11 hours ago, Strange said:

• Villain in a movie says, "If you don't pay the ransom / release the prisoners then you will be responsible for the death of the hostages"
• Trump blames the Democrats for his government's actions against immigrants
• Julian Assange is hiding from the law and claims he is being unlawfully detained

I think you can describe all those as non sequiturs.

There is an implication of "because you won't pay the ransom, the hostage will die".

But the death doesn't follow from non-payment. It follow from the bad guy being a bad guy.

Similarly,

"Because of what the Democrats did, we are taking actions against Immigrants"

Nope, they are doing it because they want to and would do it whatever the Democrats had done..

 

The case of Assange is more complex- it essentially depends on who you believe. The facts are not known so it's probably not a good choice to use in a discussion of logic.

[nevim]

10 hours ago, StringJunky said:

 Blame shifting or psychological projection.

 

Thanks String Junky, I missed this one earlier. Personally, I believe this could be the answer to the OP.

[Strange]

2 hours ago, John Cuthber said:

Lying.

True. But like so many other possible answers, this could cover a multitude of sins. 

(I would give you a +1 but I seem to have used them all up!)

1 hour ago, John Cuthber said:

I think you can describe all those as non sequiturs.

There is an implication of "because you won't pay the ransom, the hostage will die".

But the death doesn't follow from non-payment. It follow from the bad guy being a bad guy.

That is an excellent statement of the key point I am trying to describe.

It is a non sequitur (and a lie and many of the other things described) but I was hoping for something specific to this particular type of non sequitur, lie, scapegoating, etc.

(I would give you another +1 but ...)

1 hour ago, John Cuthber said:

The case of Assange is more complex- it essentially depends on who you believe. The facts are not known so it's probably not a good choice to use in a discussion of logic.

True. But it was his childish whinging this morning that brought this question to mind....

[John Cuthber]

23 minutes ago, Strange said:

I would give you a +1 but I seem to have used them all up!)

I can wait...

[StringJunky]

55 minutes ago, Strange said:

True. But like so many other possible answers, this could cover a multitude of sins. 

(I would give you a +1 but I seem to have used them all up!)

That is an excellent statement of the key point I am trying to describe.

It is a non sequitur (and a lie and many of the other things described) but I was hoping for something specific to this particular type of non sequitur, lie, scapegoating, etc.

(I would give you another +1 but ...)

True. But it was his childish whinging this morning that brought this question to mind....

One could say he's constructively imprisoned. A bit like being constructively dismissed from your job by making your conditions unbearable.

[iNow]

Damn. I was feeling pretty good about my answer until I read John’s. Leave it to a chemist to distill our conversation down to greatest purity!

[Strange]

21 hours ago, StringJunky said:

 Blame shifting or psychological projection.

 

I think blame-shifting is the right term. It still feels a bit unsatisfactory for some reason but that’s my problem !

[StringJunky]

2 hours ago, Strange said:

I think blame-shifting is the right term. It still feels a bit unsatisfactory for some reason but that’s my problem !

There is a word and it begins with 'c' and ends in 't' and it's reserved for specially bad people. Both Assange and Trump are perfect examples.

[MarkE]

On 6/18/2018 at 11:29 AM, StringJunky said:

 Blame shifting or psychological projection.

Quote

Psychological projection. Psychological projection is a theory in psychology in which humans defend themselves against their own unconscious impulses or qualities (both positive and negative) by denying their existence in themselves while attributing them to others. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection

 

In addition to your psychological (thinking) effect, here's the physical (doing) effect: Displacement (psychology) is an unconscious defense mechanism whereby the mind substitutes either a new aim or a new object for goals felt in their original form to be dangerous or unacceptable https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Displacement_(psychology).

And here's some more information (for those who are interested):
- Displaced behaviour can occur when someone cannot aggress towards the source of incitement or provocation, so instead takes it out on something else and behaves aggressively towards another individual that had nothing to do with the initial conflict.
- Displacement of aggression Is 'Associated with Reduced Stress Levels among Men but Not Women'. We found no evidence that displacement behaviour alleviates (verlicht) stress in women; by marked contrast, displacement behaviour was associated with reduced stress in men. Men engage more often in displacement behaviour, and subsequently reported lower levels of stress (paper).

[iNow]

6 hours ago, Strange said:

I think blame-shifting is the right term. It still feels a bit unsatisfactory for some reason but that’s my problem !

Nah. I'm pretty sure it's the linguists fault. If it weren't for those blowhards at Merriam-Webster, we wouldn't be in this mess!

[StringJunky]

1 hour ago, iNow said:

Nah. I'm pretty sure it's the linguists fault. If it weren't for those blowhards at Merriam-Webster, we wouldn't be in this mess!

Should stick to the Oxford English Dictionary.