LegTech - Complex Question Fallacy
LegTech - Complex Question Fallacy
3D - Legal Technique
Fernando, Catarina D.
Laurel, Ronald Julian T.
Macasinag, Joven M.
A question that has a presupposition built in, which implies something but protects the
one asking the question from accusations of false claims. It is a form of misleading
discourse, and it is a fallacy when the audience does not detect the assumed information
implicit in the question and accepts it as a fact.
When several questions are combined into one, in such a way that a yes-or-no answer is
required, the person they are asked of has no chance to give separate replies to each, and
the fallacy of the complex question is committed...
All of them contain an assumption that the concealed question has already been answered
affirmatively. It is this unjustified presumption which constitutes the fallacy...
The fallacy of complex question is usually (but not always) in the form or a question. The
fallacy involves the asking of a question that tacitly assumes the truth of a statement (or
occurrence of a state of affairs) not generally granted or not given into evidence.
Trick Questions
The fallacy of complex question is the interrogative form of the fallacy of begging the
question. Like the latter, it begs the question by assuming the conclusion at issue.
Before rushing to answer a complex question, it is best to question the question:
In each of these questions there lies an assumed answer to a previous question. Did John
have bad habits? is the unasked question whose answer is assumed in question b. We
need to withhold any answer to question b until this prior question has been resolved. In
some instances of this fallacy, considerable struggle may be necessary in order to liberate
ourselves from the misleading influence of a complex question.
The serious consequences of complex questions can be appreciated by considering these
trick questions, which would be out of order in a court of law:
d) What did you use to wipe your fingerprints from the gun?
e) How long had you contemplated this robbery before you carried it out?
An Implicit Argument
Examples
How many school shootings should we tolerate before we change the gun laws?
Explanation: The presupposition is that changing the gun laws will decrease the number
of school shootings. This may be the case, but it is a claim that is implied in the
statement and hidden by a more complex question. Reactively, when one hears a
question such as this, one's mind will attempt to search for an answer to the question—
which is actually a distraction from rejecting the implicit claim being made. It is quite
brilliant but still fallacious.
"'Let's talk about Glaucon. Where did you get the poison you used on him?
"'I never!'
"'His whole family died—wife, children, mother, the lot. Surely you feel badly about
that?'
"Didymus passed his hand over his eyes. 'I didn't poison anyone.'”
"He was woken two hours later and presently a doctor examined him.
"'What drugs were you on?' he asked.
"Wilt stared at him blankly. 'I've never taken any drugs in my life,' he muttered."