Is there a term for when an arguer simultaneously (1) states their case again and (2) claims the argument should stop?
Thread #4522, Post #51: I will just say one last time that there is no way Frank would have done that, and it is clear at this point that the manager was 100% correct in her assessment. But really, let's stop arguing about this.
It is odd because if the person really wants the back-and-forth to stop, then obviously they shouldn't lob another volley. It seems to be an attempt to end the argument while letting themself have the last word.
This is a very common (and rarely successful) tactic in arguments in online forums. I think the people doing it often don't realize the hypocrisy of what they are doing: they themselves are continuing the argument, while they are asking the other person to stop.
This isn't exactly a fallacious argument, so it is unlikely to appear in a list of fallacies, nor is it the sort of behavioral pattern that would appear in a list of unconstructive behaviors. And yet it is so common to see that I would expect there to be a term for it.
Here are the most related terms I can find, but none of them comes close to pinpointing this common tactic.
- "Argumentum ad baculum" with the implicit threat being that the argument will continue if the opponent does not capitulate. But this is not a physical threat.
- "Thought-terminating cliché", although there is not really a set phrase that is used, and the request to stop arguing is also not on-topic, so this is not a great fit either.
- "Argumentum ad nauseam" is often being used simultaneously, and this (saying the argument should stop) seems to be an appeal for the other person to let this tactic succeed already without the speaker needing to continue any longer.
I would expect the term to be a word or phrase usable in a sentence such as "The post quoted above in grey is a good example of ________." But even if the usage would differ from that, it would be useful to have any word or phrase that clearly indicates this tactic.