A critic’s argument can be structured as a detective story

Evidence

A “type” of intellectual response is identified, much as a detective might explain an otherwise esoteric sort of criminal behavior. A list is drawn up of suspects, then the detective explains “the one thing they always overlook.” Having set the stage, all the characters are summoned to a meeting in the drawing room. Then, the fatal flaw in the criminal’s approach is exposed, and an arrest is made. A few wise reflections on the vagaries of mankind close the scene. — Philip Chase Bobbitt, Reflections Inspired by My Critics, 817

Categorization

• XREF: This parallels the way the author elsewhere describes critics and thought-traditions as recognizable ‘types’ whose predictable moves can be mapped. — connects to: Logical form and avoiding fallacies remain critical tools of persuasion — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 146

Related

• The detective analogy exposes a critic’s detective role also misfires comically (similarity 0.82)

Broader Connections

• Logical form and avoiding fallacies remain critical tools of persuasion #exemplifies (0.30) — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 146