Estimated reading time: 7 minutes
The proposal is treated as an emergency.
The speaker shows unwavering confidence in his stance regarding the evidence, which is less than complete. Then, questions posed by others are viewed as a delay in proceeding with the current suggestion, and any doubt that is expressed by others (regarding this proposal) will be framed as disloyal to the organization. And then, the speaker concludes his reasoning with the statement,
“If we care about the team, then we should support this today.”
It does not appear that the speaker has lied about any of the facts, right?
In fact, the speaker has not only changed the way in which his arguments are being presented, but he has also changed the type of incentive being presented.
The speaker now presents a proposal that is intended to be a practical decision; however, as soon as a proposal is indicated as being a practical decision, it creates a situation that tests the integrity of a person.
The logical question that should be asked about this argument should be:
