Logical Fallacies in Character Dialogue

Hello internet. It has been a while. I come to you with a compromise: I don't run myself ragged trying to post for this blog all the time and you get to enjoy the blog over the summer, twice a week. How does that sound? It sounds excellent? Awesome.

Today, I'm thinking about dialogue, specifically the type of dialogue that happens when characters argue: when a debate forms and characters expose their opinion, offering the reader a glimpse at some of the outcomes they may not have noticed earlier.

When characters argue it allows the author a moment to develop possible story threads: what is happening, in a discussion between two characters, especially a heated discussion, is the author is allowing the reader to see possible outcomes. In a debate, characters offer different courses of action: I think the most obvious example of this is the 'cliché zombie film.' In almost every zombie film, characters will debate whether to leave the safety they have achieved, to reach a greater goal, or stay put. This is no real argument: in most cases, the characters must leave to progress the plot. Look at the airplane used in Resident Evil: Afterlife (use the site linked at your own risk, and keep in mind legal issues with streaming videos.), as an example of this debate. A similar debate in the same movie is based around whether to release a prisoner, or not. Again, the obvious solution is that he must be released to progress the plot.

And this brings us to our website of the day: a site about logical falacies.

To create a convincing argument in a narrative, remember that your characters aren't perfect: they make mistakes, and if they don't, they need some other flaw to make them believable. For instance, House doesn't make mistakes in diagnosis (often) but is fallible in other ways. To make a convincing non-argument, because ultimately you as the author decide who wins any argument, and how, make sure to include logical fallacies, or remove them, to increase of decrease the viability of the character's argument. If you want to garner sympathy for a character, then remove logical fallacies, and readers will begin to nod along with what he/she is saying. Add logical fallacies to decrease the legitimacy of an argument, or to indicate that a character is thinking on their feet, stressed, or nervous. All of these things can limit the ability for a character to make a compelling argument, and just because the character makes a poor argument, does not mean the character isn't right.

Finally, remember that you are in control. Don't resolve every argument with dialogue: make sure you include conflicts that resolve themselves, sometimes in neither (or any) of the ways mentioned in the dialogue. Have the prisoner break out. Have someone steal the plane. Light the shelter the apocalypse survivors had decided to stay in, on fire. Have fun with it. There's nothing quite as satisfying as throwing out twists of fate, and generally messing with your characters. Keep in mind: if you are bored with the story, so is your reader.