For example: Some people believe that money will motivate anyone to do things (both legal and illegal acts) they would never do and they will argue this, regardless of the circumstances. However, that logic would also apply to them. By assuming we are conditioned psychologically to collect things that leads to a reward, then they inadvertently included themselves into the equation for which they cannot omit from. If they do, then their conclusion must not be true.
If I use this technique (reductio ad absurdum) and take a person’s argument to its logical extreme would this be my only solution to reasoning?