Amphibology happens when a sentence is constructed ambiguously and allows two or more interpretations. In persuasive discourse, that ambiguity is used to promise something without committing to anything verifiable.
Example
“We will support teachers with overdue salaries.”
(Does it mean supporting teachers who have overdue salaries or implementing overdue salaries for teachers?)
Applied example (political)
“Subsidies for companies with laid-off employees.”
(Unclear if it rewards layoffs or prevents them.)
Applied example (mystical)
“Spiritual guides with revealed messages.”
(Unclear if guides receive messages or use predefined messages.)
Why it is fallacious
- The conclusion depends on the most convenient reading, not on what is stated.
- It enables backtracking: “that’s not what I meant”.
- It avoids defining key terms and makes verification difficult.
How to spot it
- Modifiers that can attach to different parts of a sentence.
- Unclear references: who, what, when, how.
- Vague promises or slogans with multiple readings.
How to respond
- Ask for a precise, unambiguous reformulation.
- Separate the possible meanings and ask which one is intended.
- Demand operational definitions for key terms.