The rhetorical technique that annoys me the most plays out like this...
Me: Thing
You: I hate that thing
Me: You don’t understand Thing. Here’s Thing explained.
You: I understand Thing, I still hate it.
Me: You don’t understand Thing. When you understand it, you’ll like it. (Repeat)
Sometimes this is stupidity thinking that understanding is missing, but I think it’s usually shady just so they have something to say to counter the objection that is visible to people outside the conversation, who are interested, and at least see some form of technical interaction.
There needs to be a catchy name for this type of interaction. I loathe it as well and it's annoyingly common. Companies that rely on this behavior should be called out repeatedly.
Willful misunderstanding?
Confusion redirect?
Defray to diffuse?
The technique seems super common now, and I’ve been expecting to run into it in some communications training, but haven’t yet.
I feel like there’s some crisis PR tactics this fits into that involves “Never disagree, redirect and ignore.” It diffuses criticism and makes it hard to argue.
It seems related to when I see a complaint on a review site that’s been responded to with “I’m the manager, please call me.” It doesn’t resolve the issue, but it shows that someone is doing something, so it diffuses pile on because it stops complaints of ignoring customers.
I've learned this lesson personally. Trying to be "clear" about my own perspective while ignoring what the other person feels.
"You don't like what you see? Impossible, you just can't see it. Let me make you see!"