✨ There’s a lot of talk about the ending of Pluribus — and the creators have explained why they chose it. Here are some statements from showrunner Vince Gilligan and the writers about the finale:

1. “It would have been satisfying but not as satisfying.” — on the original ending that was scrapped.
2. “Apple and Sony said, ‘Is there an even better ending to be had?’ And we listened.” — on why the dramatic finale was chosen.
3. “It made for a better ending.” — Gilligan on the new finale.
4. “Other than the atom bomb not being part of it, it was not open warfare.” — on how the original ending differed.


🤔 Your turn: Where’s the fallacy? Which thinking traps can you spot in these statements?

💡 Quick Context (for background, not to include in the post)

The finale of Pluribus — Apple TV’s sci-fi drama by Vince Gilligan — ends on a dramatic note with an atomic bomb element and a significant shift from an earlier, more subtle planned ending. The creators discussed the changes and why they think the new version works better.
Highlighted sentences link to their corresponding truth blocks. Click any highlighted sentence to jump to its detailed analysis.
Highlight Colors Indicate Content Type & Quality:
Strong Reasoning - Clear logic & evidence
Moderate - Some structure, could improve
Weak Reasoning - Fallacies or poor logic
ℹ️ Not Evaluable - Questions, personal statements (not poor quality)
Note: Gray highlights with dashed borders (ℹ️) indicate content like questions or personal experiences that aren't meant to present logical arguments. Low scores on these don't mean poor quality!
Source