Apps

🧪 This platform is in early beta. Features may change and you might encounter bugs. We appreciate your patience!

Strategic Ignorance (Discourse)

Also Known As: Feigned Incomprehension Sea Lioning (related)
Discourse Mechanics ID: strategic_ignorance

Definition

A discourse tactic where a participant feigns confusion or misunderstanding to force an opponent into repeated explanation, consuming time and energy while preventing the argument from advancing. Distinguished from genuine confusion by its selectivity and persistence after clear explanations.

Examples

After a clear explanation of how a tax policy would work, a debater repeatedly says 'I still do not understand how that would reduce inequality' despite the mechanism having been explained multiple times.

During contract negotiations, a union representative explains three times in plain language how the proposed overtime calculation would reduce take-home pay. Each time, the HR director responds: 'I'm just not seeing how the math works out that way — can you walk me through it again?' The repeated explanations consume the meeting time, and no agreement is reached.

In a social media debate, a user makes a clear and sourced argument about the gender pay gap, distinguishing between raw and adjusted figures. Their opponent repeatedly responds: 'But what exactly do you mean by pay gap? I'm genuinely confused about your definition.' Despite multiple clarifications, the 'confusion' persists, preventing any substantive engagement with the evidence presented.

Verification Steps
Verification Steps
Binary yes/no questions that an AI must answer to detect a reasoning pattern in a text.
Each of the 452 aspects has verification steps — simple yes/no questions designed to systematically detect whether a pattern appears in a text. For ad hominem: "Does the argument attack a person rather than their claim?" For false dichotomy: "Are only two options presented when more exist?" This ensures consistent, reproducible analysis.

Binary (yes/no) questions an LLM must answer to identify this aspect:

  1. 1

    Is a participant claiming not to understand a point that has been clearly explained?

    Type: binary
  2. 2

    Does the claimed confusion force the opponent to repeatedly explain rather than advance the argument?

    Type: binary
  3. 3

    Does the 'confused' party selectively understand arguments that support their position?

    Type: binary
Deep Dive
The expandable detail section on each aspect page with examples, psychology, and counter-strategies.
The Deep Dive section provides in-depth information about each aspect: a real-world example showing the pattern in action, an explanation of why it works psychologically, practical advice on how to counter it, alternative names, and links to related aspects.

Hierarchical Context