Term for allowing implausible scenario in argument

Question

What is the term for allowing an implausible scenario in order to be as generous as possible to the claim one is about to knock down? Example:

Acme Acres recorded 2,000 births last year, but the town has only 500
women. Even if they are all of child-bearing age and each had two
deliveries last year, it is still virtually impossible that they gave
birth to 2,000 babies. Either out-of-towners were flocking to Acme
Acres to deliver or the statistic is wrong.

It's a little like "giving the benefit of the doubt" "for the sake of argument", but I don't think "doubt" is the right word here (the allowed scenario is almost certainly false). There should be a precise term or expression from this kind of argumentation, at least a Latin one from law or a Greek one from rhetoric.

LPH · Answer

Actually, you are not allowing anything but reasoning on a limit case possibility. As a type of reasoning I  would call it "disproof of the conclusion on the basis of the impossibility of a limit case".
I don't think there is one word term for this sort of reasoning; at best, there might be a rather long phrase.

Anton · Answer

By accepting an implausible argument or unlikely assertions you are giving your opponent enough rope to hang himself

give (one) enough rope
If you give people the opportunity to do something wrong or detrimental to themselves, they will usually do it; one does not need to interfere to bring about someone's downfall. The full version is, "Give (one) enough rope, and (one) will hang (one)self."
"Don't interrupt him with questions. Just let him keep talking and he'll incriminate himself. Give him enough rope and see what happens"
Free Dictionary

Lawrence · Answer

The common English phrase used is for the sake of argument.

for the sake of argument phrase
As a basis for discussion or reasoning.
‘suppose, for the sake of argument, that this is the legal position’
-Lexico

Tinfoil Hat · Answer

I believe you have a kind of mashup of procatalepsis and reductio ad absurdum.
The OED defines procatalepsis as:

A rhetorical figure by which an opponent's objections are anticipated
and answered

and reductio ad absurdum as:

The practice of demonstrating the falsity of a hypothesis, principle,
etc., by showing that the consequence of assuming it to be true is
something absurd or contradictory

Proposition: It's impossible that 500 women birthed 2,000 babies last year.
Anticipated objection: 500 women averaging two babies a year = 2,000 births.
Implied absurdum: Assuming women could average two births per year, picture the population count!
Conclusion: Either out-of-towners were flocking to Acme Acres to deliver, or the statistic is wrong.

Term for allowing implausible scenario in argument

4 Answers

Add your own answers!

Ask a Question