Domain Violations: A Systematic Taxonomy of Fallacies

This article completes the architectural theory of fallacies developed in Article 4 by providing systematic treatment of Type 2: Domain Violations. Where Article 4 established the method and treated violations of conditions (Type 1), sequence (Type 3), syndromes (Type 4), and context-dependent methods (Type 5), this article analyzes the 105 fallacies that occur within the six domains of reasoning. Each domain—Recognition, Clarification, Framework Selection, Comparison, Inference, and Reflection—has characteristic failure modes determined by its function and governing principle. Domain 1 (Recognition) fails through object deformation, object substitution, data filtration, projection, and source distortion. Domain 2 (Clarification) fails through meaning drift, hidden agency, incomplete analysis, and overexplanation. Domain 3 (Framework Selection) fails through category mismatch, irrelevant criteria, and result-driven framing. Domain 4 (Comparison) fails through false equation, unstable criteria, and comparison with the nonexistent. Domain 5 (Inference) fails through logical gaps, causal errors, chain errors, and scale errors. Domain 6 (Reflection) fails through illusions of completion, self-assessment distortion, past investment effects, and immunization from testing. The taxonomy reveals that fallacies are not arbitrary errors but systematic violations of the architecture of reasoning. Each domain’s failures follow from its function: recognition fails by corrupting what is perceived; clarification fails by corrupting what it means; framework selection fails by corrupting by what standard; comparison fails by corrupting how things relate; inference fails by corrupting what follows; reflection fails by corrupting what the limits are. Understanding this structure transforms fallacy detection from pattern-matching into architectural diagnosis.