A specific variant that casts the argument itself as the mindless, bouncing object being hit back and forth without agency or resolution. It portrays the points being made as inherently empty or trivial—just a "ball" in a silly game. This dehumanizes the debaters and trivializes their stakes, suggesting the topic is frivolous and the participants are just keeping it alive for sport.
Example: During a serious policy debate on healthcare, one side presents a cost analysis. The opponent replies, "We're not doing this. I'm not your ping-pong ball fallacy. I won't keep bouncing this same tired argument back and forth so you can feel like you're playing a game." This reframes a substantive exchange as a trivial volley, attempting to unilaterally declare the topic beneath consideration.
by Dumuabzu February 3, 2026
Get the Ping-pong Ball Fallacy mug.An ad hominem version that attacks the debater personally, labeling them as someone who only argues for the sake of conflict or "playing the game." It pathologizes the act of disagreement, painting the person as a compulsive "player" addicted to rhetorical combat rather than truth-seeking. This fallacy dismisses all their points by attacking their purported motivation for engaging at all.
Example: "Don't bother with him, he's not actually interested in solutions. He's a classic ping-pong player fallacy—he just likes the sound of his own voice and watching people react. Any reply you give is just another serve for him." This disqualifies the person from being heard by assigning them a malicious, sport-like intent.
by Dumuabzu February 3, 2026
Get the Ping-pong Player Fallacy mug.