Reductio ad Absurdum
(“Reduction to the absurd”)
A form of argument which exaggerates the other side’s case to absurdity, and then argues against it. It is effective because, even though it is obviously absurd, it implies that your opponents’ actual argument is no less absurd, and that she has not thought through the reality. It can very effectively remove any danger of the argument getting somewhere. This is similar to the Straw Man, except that it takes particular delight in exploring the ludicrous extreme.
However, reductio ad absurdum can also be used as a means of constructive simplification to make a point. While many principles in economics textbooks are grossly oversimplified with children’s-storybook examples, it is also true that they can clarify some of the fundamental economic relationships: e.g., stories about Robinson Crusoe and Man Friday, or about a person whose shopping list contains just two items—apples and pears, or cummerbunds and kumquats. The trouble is, some people who learn their economics in an engaging scale-model landscape find it hard to leave it. The models of great beauty and complexity which emerge can confirm the richly-misleading potential of absurd assumptions (Economism). Example of a useful reductio ad absurdum: the discussion of “2+2=4” in Distraction.
Related entries:
Fallacies, Slippery Slope, Hyperbole.
« Back to List of Entries