The fallacy of assuming that it is possible to convince or argue with anyone about anything—including positions so extreme, so absurd, so morally repugnant that they should be beyond the pale of debate. The Fallacy of
Impossible Convincing imagines that reason is omnipotent, that every position can be engaged, that no topic is off-limits for discussion. It leads
people to "debate" whether slavery should be reinstated, whether
genocide has merits, whether racism is defensible—as if these were open questions rather than settled horrors. The fallacy ignores that some positions are not reached through reason and cannot be dislodged by it. Engaging them as if they were reasonable gives them legitimacy they
don't deserve.
Example: "He insisted on debating whether racism had any merits—'just to hear all sides.' The Fallacy of
Impossible Convincing had convinced him that every position deserved a hearing, that reason could
handle anything. But some things
aren't positions; they're atrocities. Engaging them as arguments legitimizes what should only be condemned. He wasn't being open-minded; he was being complicit."