🧪 This platform is in early beta. Features may change and you might encounter bugs. We appreciate your patience!
shifting_goalpost
Moving the Goalposts involves changing or adding criteria for success or validity after an argument or evidence has met the original standard. Rather than acknowledging that a challenge has been answered, the speaker shifts the threshold — demanding more, different, or new conditions. The tactic makes any counterargument effectively unfalsifiable.
After a vaccine reaches the originally stated efficacy threshold, critics demand it also prevent transmission — a criterion not part of the original approval standard.
A media outlet demands a study be peer-reviewed; when it is, demands replication; when replicated, demands a meta-analysis — never conceding the underlying point.
A regulator tells a company its product will be approved after three safety tests. After all three are passed, two additional tests are introduced.
Binary (yes/no) questions an LLM must answer to identify this aspect:
Was a specific criterion for success, evidence, or argument previously established?
Type: binaryHas the speaker changed or added criteria after the original standard was met?
Type: binaryDoes the change in criteria serve to avoid acknowledging the achievement or the validity of the opposing argument?
Type: binaryMoving the Goalposts involves changing or adding criteria for success or validity after an argument or evidence has met the original standard. Rather than acknowledging that a challenge has been answered, the speaker shifts the threshold — demanding more, different, or new conditions. The tactic makes any counterargument effectively unfalsifiable.
Audiences rarely track the evolution of criteria across a debate or news cycle. Shifting goalposts exploits this by creating a moving target that can never be reached. It signals apparent rigor while ensuring standards can never be fully satisfied.
Document and cite the original standard explicitly. Ask the speaker to commit to specific, falsifiable criteria up front and hold them accountable to those criteria.
Common in political evaluation of government programs where success metrics are redefined post-hoc. Also frequent in media coverage of scientific studies, where demands for proof escalate regardless of evidence quality.
Use these tools to detect, analyze, or train this aspect.