A meta-fallacy and meta-bias that functions as the opposite of a logical leap. Instead of criticizing an actual leap in reasoning, the accuser labels any inference—no matter how well-supported—as a “logical leap,” “hasty generalization,” or “non sequitur.” The goal is to discredit the opponent’s logic or conclusions without engaging the content. Logical retention sets an impossibly high bar for what counts as a valid step, demanding that every premise be exhaustively defended and every implication be explicitly spelled out. It is a form of epistemic gatekeeping that makes productive argument impossible.
Logical Retention Example: “He had provided a three‑step argument with sources for each step; she called it a ‘logical leap.’ Logical retention: refusing to accept any inference as valid.”
by Abzugal April 3, 2026
Get the Logical Retention mug.