Nirvana fallacy ("thats not perfect"-manipulation):
Rejecting the presented solution to a problem because of insufficient accuracy or perfection.
Retrospective determinism ("because he did this, the other thing was inevitable")
Creating a seemlingly ever-existing combination of two actions which are by nature seperated from each other
Poisoning the well ("You cant be a good politician, you killed a flie once")
Irrelevant Information is being introduced to the debate to generally manipulate any further form of respect towards the argument or person
Lets find an example for all 3 in the same scenario. You want a job in a firm, but currently another atorney is nominated, who is thought to be very clever but lacking in education. How can you use the 3 types of manipulative arguments for your advantage?
