Moving the Goalposts Fallacy
Also known as: Raising the Bar
What is Moving the Goalposts?
Moving the goalposts occurs when someone sets a standard of evidence for a claim, and after that standard is met, they change the requirement to a higher or different standard rather than accepting the evidence. This makes the claim effectively unfalsifiable because no amount of evidence will ever be enough — the goalposts keep moving. It is a form of intellectual dishonesty that avoids conceding a point.
Example
A debate about the effectiveness of remote work.
“'Show me one company that's succeeded with full remote work.' / 'Here's GitLab — fully remote, billion-dollar valuation.' / 'Well, show me a traditional Fortune 500 company that's done it. That's different.'”
The original challenge was met with a valid example, but instead of acknowledging it, the criteria were shifted to a more specific and harder-to-meet standard. If that new standard were met, the goalposts would likely move again.
How to Spot It
- A specific standard of proof is requested and, once met, is changed to something more demanding.
- Each piece of evidence is acknowledged but dismissed as 'not enough' or 'not the right kind.'
- The criteria shift without explanation or acknowledgment that the original standard was met.
- The argument feels impossible to 'win' because the requirements keep changing.
How to Counter It
- Document the original criteria before presenting evidence.
- Point out explicitly that the goalposts have shifted: 'You asked for X, I provided it, and now you're asking for Y.'
- Ask upfront: 'What evidence would you accept?' and hold them to that answer.
- Recognize when further engagement is unlikely to be productive.
Related Fallacies
Check your arguments for logical fallacies
Try the Fallacy Checker