The act of accusing someone of turning a debate into a pointless back-and-forth ("ping-pong") by merely responding to their points, thereby framing any defense or counter-argument as proof of their own unproductivity. It’s a meta-critique that tries to invalidate engagement itself, suggesting that by playing the game (using the "paddle"), you are automatically proving the opponent's point that the discussion is futile or cyclical. This fallacy seeks a cheap win by declaring the act of arguing to be the losing move.
Example: In a debate about movie preferences, Person A says, "Modern CGI is soulless." Person B offers counter-examples of expressive CGI. Person A retorts, "Stop swinging the ping-pong paddle fallacy—you're just proving my point that fanboys will defend anything by arguing endlessly." Here, the very act of offering a rebuttal is twisted into evidence of blind fandom, shutting down the exchange.
by Dumuabzu February 3, 2026
Get the Ping-pong Paddle Fallacy mug.