The Contradiction Trap: A Dialectical and Game-Theoretic Framework for Exposing Structural Bias

This paper introduces the contradiction trap: a dialectical and game-theoretic method for exposing concealed asymmetry in institutional and algorithmic reasoning. By forcing a system to reconcile mutually exclusive commitments, the trap converts inconsistency into evidence — a falsifiable signal of structural bias, motivated deviation, or narrative drift. The framework models contradiction as a one-move epistemic game with informational payoffs. Instead of treating contradiction as a logical defect, the trap operationalises it as a diagnostic tool: a way of measuring whether a system behaves in accordance with the principles it declares. This makes contradiction a practical instrument for auditing neutrality claims across governance, organisational decision-making, and AI systems. The Contradiction Trap forms the opening contribution to a broader programme in the mathematics of integrity: a unified approach in which reasoning, processes, and institutions demonstrate their legitimacy through resistance to structured challenge. This paper establishes the epistemic foundations; subsequent work develops procedural and institutional counterparts. Keywords: contradiction; epistemic game theory; evidential reasoning; structural bias; motivated asymmetry; governance integrity; algorithmic accountability; dialectical logic; audit design; fairness diagnostics; adversarial evaluation; philosophy of technology.