Today's logical fallacy is the Loaded Question. It's when someone asks a question that has a built-in assumption - usually negative - and you can't answer it without looking guilty, defensive, or trapped. No matter what you say, you're already boxed in.

This is one of those sneaky little tactics that shows up everywhere: in arguments, interviews, politics, even dating. The question isn't just a question - it's a weapon.

Now, I'll admit that, back in the day (which was a Tuesday) I used this one, but purely for comedic effect. If one of my buddies was talking to a girl he liked, I'd walk up and say, "Hey, so how's the herpes?" Totally unfair. Totally a loaded question. There's no good way to answer that. If he says "What?" he looks confused. If he says "I don't have herpes," now the subject is in the air. Either way, it leaves a bad impression - which, of course, was the point.

That's a humorous example, but it's the same fallacy that gets weaponized in more serious settings. Take sales, for example. I once took a business sales & marketing class from a guy whose methods I ended up completely rejecting. One of his go-to moves was to teach students to ask customers loaded questions like, "So, what date would you like to schedule the installation?" even if the customer hadn't agreed to anything yet. It's designed to push the customer past the decision point by assuming the sale - and hoping they won't object. It's not just pushy. It's manipulative. And I hate those kinds of tactics.

I've run into this in real life with door-to-door salespeople. Here in Southwest Florida, it's common for solar reps* to show up pretending they're from the utility company. They'll ignore the "No Soliciting" signs and start with something like, "Hey, maybe you can help me out real quick - are you the homeowner, or is it your spouse?" That question assumes you're already willing to engage, and by answering it, you've essentially agreed to start the conversation. It's a tactic designed to break through resistance by skipping over whether or not you want to talk in the first place. Classic loaded question. It's not about getting information. It's about bypassing consent.

Another common loaded question comes up the moment you answer your phone. Someone says, "Is this Richard Rost speaking?" Seems innocent, but it's actually a tactic. The question assumes you're willing to confirm your identity without knowing who you're talking to or why they're calling. Bill collectors and phone scammers use this all the time. You're under no obligation to identify yourself to someone who called you. If they want information, they can start by identifying themselves first. Don't fall into the trap of giving away personal info just because someone asks in a polite tone.

One of the earliest examples I can think of from my own business days goes back to the 1990s, when I was running a computer sales and service company back in Buffalo. I had a little fax newsletter that I sent out to about 20 or 30 thousand companies every month. It was fantastic advertising, and aside from the cost of the phone lines, it was basically free. To build that fax list, I used a cheesy sales tactic I'm not proud of today. I would cold-call companies listed in the phone book and casually ask whoever answered the phone, "Hey, can I get your fax number real quick?" Most people assumed I was a vendor or someone sending them an invoice or a contract. But in reality, I was adding them to my unsolicited marketing list. Totally legal (at the time). Questionably moral**.

This happens in business meetings too. Ever been in a room where someone says, "Why are you resisting this idea?" The assumption is that you're resisting, and now you're defending yourself instead of discussing the merits of the idea. It reframes the discussion before you've had a chance to participate.

One of the clearest Star Trek examples of a loaded question comes from Encounter at Farpoint, when Q puts humanity on trial. He doesn't just ask if the Enterprise crew is peaceful. He hits them with, "How can you claim to be civilized when your history is soaked in blood?" It's not a question meant to be answered. It's a trap. It builds in the assumption that humanity is inherently savage, and anything Picard says in response is already framed as a defense against guilt. Q's entire courtroom was one long exercise in loaded questioning disguised as inquiry.

The problem with loaded questions is that they're designed to bypass your logic circuits. They aim for your emotions. The best defense is to call them out. Refuse the premise. Say, "That's not the question we should be asking." Or reframe it on your own terms.

Just because someone asks you a question doesn't mean you owe them an answer in their format.

LLAP
RR

* Just for the record, I do not do business with any door-to-door salesperson. Period. The only exception is Girl Scouts. I will buy their cookies. But companies like Soligo, a solar company here in Florida, are a perfect example of why I feel this way. One of their reps came to my house, ignored all three of my clearly posted "No Soliciting" signs, and launched into a high-pressure pitch. Even after I told him I wasn't interested, he insisted, "I'm not soliciting, I'm just sharing information." No. That's not how words work. If you're trying to persuade me to take an action, that's soliciting. And if your sales process starts with ignoring boundaries, that's already a deal-breaker.

** That little tactic helped me build a huge audience fast, and after a while, the newsletter became extremely popular. I used a simple Q&A format - not all that different from what I do today with TechHelp - and I would regularly get calls from people asking why they didn't receive their fax that month if they missed it. Looking back, I do feel a little bad about how I got the ball rolling, but it's not all that different from how a lot of now-legit companies got their start. Look at Uber. In many cities, they launched their service before the regulations caught up. Same thing with Airbnb. Sometimes companies bend the rules at the start and hope to sort out the legality later. I'm not saying it's right - just that it's not uncommon. The FTC has since enacted regulations saying that you can't fax someone without their prior consent, so that newsletter wouldn't work today.