5 Common Fallacies of Narcissism

We are all guilty of being wrong from time to time, but where do you draw the line between having a big ego, and having a narcissistic personality? In this article, we will discuss the 5 most common arguments you will find yourself facing with a narcissist.

#1.) False Dichotomies

It's the most common fallacy to infect syllogistic logic today; the if/then proposal. You may be sitting with your mother discussing something that she is doing wrong that is hurting you. No matter how many times you prove her wrong, she sounds like a broken record, constantly regurgitating the same arbitrary issues of your past. "Oh yeah? Well if you did that thing 8 years ago, then you have no right to bring up what i'm doing" You will find these people constantly bringing up unrelated justifications for whatever it is that they are trying to avoid taking accountability for. You will never win an argument because they are constantly deflecting to avoid chalking up to the repercussions of their toxic logic.

False dilemmas are usually characterized by “either this or that” language, but can also be characterized by omissions of choices. 

-Bo Bennett, PhD

#2.) Fallacy of Appeal to False Authority

This is an argument in which someone decides that their status as an individual of self perceived importance, gives them a higher level of expertise on a subject than the person in which they are arguing with. They will not use their perceived expertise to conduct a valid rebuttal to disprove you. They will instead use the title they acquired from their expertise and ride on that. In the case of the narcissistic however, their "expertise" is often completely unrelated to the argument and logically gives them no leverage. In their minds unfortunately, you will never be able to convince them that their 'expertise' is irrelevant. Instead of presenting an argument to back the relevance of their 'credentials' they will simply gaslight by calling you insane, repeating their 'credentials' as if you must not have heard them, and acting absolutely shocked by your inability to comprehend the fact that they are experts.

Common Appeal to False Authority Direct Examples:

"I am an officer, therefore I am an expert on speed, inertia and road banking)"

"I am your mother, therefore you shouldn't speak to me that way".

”I am an addict, therefore I am an expert on addiction.”

"I studied pathology in college so I can speak towards mental health"

Broader Examples:

"I went to _____ college, I know more"

"My husband is a ______, therefore ..."

"I worked in ______field therefore I know _____..."

"I am ___ years old, therefore I know more than you".

#3.) Ad Hominem Fallacy

This is a fallacy in which the a person refuses someone's argument and even irrefutable proof based upon personal identifiers and characteristics alone. "You are not a woman, you can't talk about oppression" "You are a millennial, you don't know pain" "You are not a mother, you can't talk about parenting" "You can't discuss god when you have tattoos" "I don't trust anyone without eyebrows" "You are not x race/party therefore your opinion on y issue is irrelevant." are all excellent and relevant examples of this invalid, unproductive, and ignorant argument that narcissists love to use when they can't properly prove their point and are trying to paint themselves as victims. Call it circumstantial evidence and dismiss the case. You will never be able to play poker with someone who uses these arguments because they aren't working with a full deck.

#4.) Build Me A Straw-man

Narcs LOVE to build a straw-man for their poison-berry field fertilized with BS. In this form of logical fallacy, a narc will commonly twist your argument to turn it into something that it isn't in order to make their argument more appealing or reasonable. This method can also be used to make you look like the bad guy in a given scenario in order to distract others from their bad argument or even take away from yours by assassinating your character. An example of a straw-man would be an argument like this:

Reasonable argument: "I understand that you are physically disabled, but I do not care for that as a response as it is not relevant to this discussion about my childhood."

Narc argument "You don't care about disabled people?! What kind of person are you?!"

#5.) Circular Reasoning

Repetition, Repetition, Repetition... Now a narc will typically not even bother worming their way around an argument into a full circle, and will simply repeat the same phrase over and over. Example;

Narc: "I am right about this"

Reasonable Person: "How are you right about that?"

Narc: "Because I am right about this."

Some will even repeat the same response over and over while talking over you and interrupting you, even if the question changes. A more elaborate and manipulative narc will form an actual 'circular argument' with their response, where they use the x is true because of y and y is true because of x as depicted in Tim Vanderzee's chart below:

"I am right because I am right about other things, therefore I am right about this, and will be right in the future".

If you are arguing with someone like this, you'll be wrong, even if you're right. It may be healthy to limit contact with this person. They are not ignorant. They are cunning. You are not crazy, they are.

Jacki Jo Duggard,

Editor, The Speed Trap Press,

Speed Media LLC. (pdc) (c) 9-11-2019 0851cst