🧪 This platform is in early beta. Features may change and you might encounter bugs. We appreciate your patience!
package_deal_fallacy
A fallacy that bundles together distinct propositions and treats them as a single package that must be accepted or rejected in its entirety. This prevents nuanced evaluation of individual claims and forces false all-or-nothing choices.
If you support free speech, you must also support hate speech, because they are the same thing.
If you believe in stricter gun regulations, you must also want to abolish the Second Amendment entirely and leave citizens defenseless — it's all the same agenda.
You can't claim to care about the environment but still eat meat. Being an environmentalist means going fully vegan, zero-waste, and car-free — you either commit to all of it or you're a hypocrite.
Binary (yes/no) questions an LLM must answer to identify this aspect:
Does the argument group together multiple distinct claims or items?
Type: binaryDoes it treat the group as inseparable, requiring acceptance or rejection of all items together?
Type: binaryCould the items reasonably be evaluated independently?
Type: binaryA fallacy that bundles together distinct propositions and treats them as a single package that must be accepted or rejected in its entirety. This prevents nuanced evaluation of individual claims and forces false all-or-nothing choices.
Grouping items together exploits the desire for consistency and simplicity. Accepting part of the package creates pressure to accept the rest.
Separate the bundled claims and evaluate each one independently. Point out that accepting one element does not require accepting others.
Political platforms, legislative riders, and commercial sales tactics ('Buy the whole suite or nothing').
Use these tools to detect, analyze, or train this aspect.