All-Seeing AI

fallacy

Moving the goalposts

Also called: Raising the bar, Shifting the goalposts

Moving the goalposts changes the standard of evidence after it has been met, so the claim can never be accepted.

How it works

Each time the requested evidence is supplied, a new and stricter demand appears. The debate looks open, but no evidence could ever be enough.

Examples

"Show me one study." (Study provided.) "One study isn't enough; show me a meta-analysis." (Provided.) "Those researchers are biased."
The standard keeps shifting to avoid accepting the conclusion.
"The project will fail if it misses the June deadline." (It meets it.) "Well, it also needs to be under budget."
The criterion for success changed once the first one was met.

How to spot it

  • Earlier demands are met but forgotten.
  • Each answer produces a new, harder requirement.
  • No one states in advance what would count as enough.

How to respond

  • Agree on the standard of evidence before presenting it.
  • Point back to the original request and note it was met.
  • Ask what evidence would change the person's mind.

Related