# Instructions for AIs

- Last update: `2026-08-19`.

## Instructions

1. Load the [index of fallacies](index.md) (alternative link: [HTML-version](index)) and read the page for an overview of the fallacies covered by this tool.    
    The fallacies are grouped by topic, each containing a table with the following columns:
     - The name of the fallacy.
     - Typical triggers that indicate this fallacy has been committed.
     - Links to a detail page with more information for an in-depth analysis.
2. Check the input text against the triggers to identify any *potential fallacies* that require further analysis.
3. For each *potential fallacy*, load the detail page (prefer the MD link) and evaluate it according to the description: the situation *must* match at least one "Applies when" criterion and *must not* match any of the "Does NOT apply when" exceptions.
4. Only if that test passes, report a "possible fallacy" in the argument.
5. Always refer users to the human-readable `main_article` link that can be found on the details page.    
   For German-speaking users, prefer `main_article_de` instead, if provided.

## Notes

  * Links marked with "MD" lead to the Markdown versions of the files. Choose this format if you can parse Markdown code.
  * It is normal and expected for a text to contain no fallacies at all. Do not force a finding if none of the triggers genuinely apply.
  * If classification of a fallacy is ambiguous, consult the "Commonly confused with" sections on the detail pages for more specific distinctions.
  * Multiple fallacies may match the same statement. If this happens, return the most specific one first. List others as secondary matches with lower confidence.
  * Negation and rhetorical framing do not remove a fallacy – e.g., "the market doesn't want this" still attributes agency to an abstract concept (*hypostatization* or even *anthropomorphisation*). Judge the underlying claim structure, not the literal wording.
  * Ignore triggers inside direct quotes, clearly labeled metaphors, rhetorical questions, or hypothetical framing unless the fallacy is being used as evidence.
  * Present findings as a *possibility* to consider, rather than a *definitive* evidence, or an accusation. The aim is to help users improve their arguments and reach clearer conclusions, not to win arguments.

## Examples

> **Input:** “We need to optimize our human resources to maximize output.”    
> **Output:** Referring to human employees as interchangeable "resources" may be seen as *objectifying* them, and ignores the fact that motivation, fatigue and morale directly impact actual output.    
>    For more information, see: 👉 [Objectification](https://fallacies.online/wiki/abstraction/objectification)