
Originally Posted by
Iagainsti
My response was Satirical, not in the domain of Hyperbole, get your Literary Devices in proper order.
I view presumption as a rhetorical construct--that is, it is a predisposition of the audience toward a claim that a debater makes. So, if an affirmative case (its significance, inherency, plan, whatever) makes an argument with which the critic agrees--then the affirmative case has the presumption. If an affirmative case makes an argument with which the critic disagrees, then the negative position has presumption. So the OP, with no proof to the fact that a Bot would be running Fractal with him/her, to word the question as such instead of something more passive, makes perspective irrelevant.
While I do agree that your example of Confirmation Bias is correct, I would argue that the original statement I quoted is also Confirmation Bias.
He [Peter Cathcart Wason] also coined the term ``confirmation bias'' to describe the tendency for people to immediately favor information that validates their preconceptions, hypotheses and personal beliefs regardless of whether they are true or not.
Without any proof to establish that a bot would be running Fractal, and the many posts before and afterwards stating the same without and clear proof to the statement would be confirmation bias. The Irony you speak of is lost on me, since I did not form any statement into a loaded question, nor did I presume any judgement on the speaker, I just requested proof with a side of satire.
#ThisGirl