What is the Moving the Goalposts Fallacy?

The Moving the Goalposts Fallacy occurs when someone:

1. Changes the evaluation criteria: Alters the standards or metrics used to assess a claim, argument, or decision.
2. Shifts the burden of proof: Changes the requirements for proving or disproving a point after the initial discussion has taken place.

Why is the Moving the Goalposts Fallacy problematic?

This fallacy can lead to:

1. Unfair shifting of standards: Creates an uneven playing field, where one party is held to different criteria than others.
2. Erosion of trust and credibility: Damages relationships and undermines confidence in the decision-making process.
3. Difficulty in resolving disputes: Makes it challenging to come to a resolution, as the goalposts are constantly being moved.

Examples of the Moving the Goalposts Fallacy

1. Changing the definition of success: Initially defining success as achieving a certain target, but then changing the definition after not meeting that target.
2. Shifting from one criterion to another: Evaluating an argument based on one set of criteria, and then switching to a different set of criteria when the initial evaluation doesn’t yield the desired outcome.
3. Raising or lowering the bar for proof: Increasing or decreasing the requirements for evidence after the fact, in order to justify a preconceived conclusion.

Real-world consequences of the Moving the Goalposts Fallacy

The Moving the Goalposts Fallacy has real-world consequences in various domains, including:

1. Business and management: Creates confusion and mistrust among team members when goals or expectations are constantly changing.
2. Science and research: Undermines the credibility of scientific findings when researchers change their methods or criteria after the fact.
3. Personal relationships: Leads to frustration and resentment in personal relationships when expectations or standards are repeatedly changed.

Avoiding the Moving the Goalposts Fallacy

To avoid this fallacy:

1. Establish clear and consistent criteria: Define evaluation standards upfront and stick to them throughout the discussion or decision-making process.
2. Be transparent about changes: Clearly communicate any changes to the criteria or standards, and explain the reasons behind those changes.
3. Use objective and verifiable metrics: Rely on measurable and quantifiable data to evaluate claims or arguments, rather than relying on subjective opinions or biases.

By being aware of the Moving the Goalposts Fallacy, we can improve our critical thinking skills, avoid creating unfair situations, and maintain trust and credibility in our interactions with others.

---

Filed under: Uncategorized - @ September 27, 2024 10:47 am