The US government swore tormenting's Pablo with constant E.L.F. broadcasts into standing up for what he didn't believe in would end up being good for the country, but it ended up being an example of The Fallacy of Means when it Really ended in economy ruining sanctions.
by DoomTheory December 22, 2020
Get the The Fallacy of Means mug.Similar to Ken Wilber's "Pre/trans fallacy", which is about conflating pre-rational views with trans-rational views, the Relative/absolute fallacy is about conflating relative perspectives with The Absolute perspective. This is the main source of confusion in the forms of spirituality that deal with the implications of non-duality (Oneness).
There are generally two levels to the fallacy:
1. The first level is the conflation that happens when you don't have knowledge about the distinction between the relative and The Absolute (dual/non-dual). This is common in pre-rational religious people (Wilber). The way that traditional religion interprets various holy texts is itself a good example.
2. The second level happens when you do have knowledge about the distinction between relative and absolute (but it's obviously not complete knowledge). This is common in (aspiring) trans-rational people. A common example is to think that because nothing ultimately really matters, morality doesn't matter, and therefore it's fine to for example hurt other people. This is to conflate "the relative" with "The Absolute". From The Absolute perspective, yes, nothing really matters, but morality can only ever be defined "relative" to a certain value system in the first place. By taking the absolute perspective, you're deliberately stepping outside of all value systems, but "it's fine to hurt other people" would be a moral statement, which means you're actually invoking a relative perspective.
There are generally two levels to the fallacy:
1. The first level is the conflation that happens when you don't have knowledge about the distinction between the relative and The Absolute (dual/non-dual). This is common in pre-rational religious people (Wilber). The way that traditional religion interprets various holy texts is itself a good example.
2. The second level happens when you do have knowledge about the distinction between relative and absolute (but it's obviously not complete knowledge). This is common in (aspiring) trans-rational people. A common example is to think that because nothing ultimately really matters, morality doesn't matter, and therefore it's fine to for example hurt other people. This is to conflate "the relative" with "The Absolute". From The Absolute perspective, yes, nothing really matters, but morality can only ever be defined "relative" to a certain value system in the first place. By taking the absolute perspective, you're deliberately stepping outside of all value systems, but "it's fine to hurt other people" would be a moral statement, which means you're actually invoking a relative perspective.
You're conflating relative perspectives with The Absolute perspective ("The Relative/Absolute Fallacy").
Albert thinks he is God and nobody else is. Albert has committed the Relative/Absolute Fallacy.
Albert thinks he is God and nobody else is. Albert has committed the Relative/Absolute Fallacy.
by Carich99 December 23, 2020
Get the The Relative/absolute fallacy mug.Also known as non causa pro causa (non cause for cause/not a cause for a cause) or false cause fallacy
A logical fallacy in which a cause is wrongly defined
A logical fallacy in which a cause is wrongly defined
Here's the exhaustive list of Questionable Cause Fallacy:
1. Post ergo propter hoc
2. Correlation means causation
3. Texas Sharpshooter
4. Circular cause and consequence
5. Singular cause fallacy
6. Regression fallacy
7. Jumping into conclusions
8. Association fallacy (guilt/honor by association, such as reductio ad Hitlerum/Godwin's Law, reductio ad Stalinum/red-tag/red-bait) {Association Fallacy is an illegitimate child between ad hominem and questionable cause fallacy/false cause fallacy/non causa pro causa}
1. Post ergo propter hoc
2. Correlation means causation
3. Texas Sharpshooter
4. Circular cause and consequence
5. Singular cause fallacy
6. Regression fallacy
7. Jumping into conclusions
8. Association fallacy (guilt/honor by association, such as reductio ad Hitlerum/Godwin's Law, reductio ad Stalinum/red-tag/red-bait) {Association Fallacy is an illegitimate child between ad hominem and questionable cause fallacy/false cause fallacy/non causa pro causa}
by Sir. B November 4, 2021
Get the questionable cause fallacy mug.An illegitimate child between ad hominem (because association fallacy focused on the PERSON or PEOPLE instead of the ARGUMENT), appeal to emotion, hasty generalization, questionable cause fallacy (because "labels" associated to someone or something can determine the degree of "truth"), and red herring (because it deliberately derails the argument)
Association Fallacy has two kinds:
1. Guilt by association
2. Honour by association
Association Fallacy has two kinds:
1. Guilt by association
2. Honour by association
Example of association fallacy:
"You're Neo-Nazi, therefore your argument must be wrong" (Godwin's Law/Reductio ad Hitlerum)
"You are leftist liberal special snowflake, therefore your argument is dismissed" (Red-bait/Red-tag)
"You're the expert, therefore your opinion must be right" (Honour by association)
"You're Neo-Nazi, therefore your argument must be wrong" (Godwin's Law/Reductio ad Hitlerum)
"You are leftist liberal special snowflake, therefore your argument is dismissed" (Red-bait/Red-tag)
"You're the expert, therefore your opinion must be right" (Honour by association)
by Sir. B November 9, 2021
Get the association fallacy mug.by Jake433 October 10, 2021
Get the Fallacy limit mug.Where you think you're more awesome than everyone else, and that your opinions are so right, they don't require justification and everyone else is stupid for thinking differently.
Person 1: "I disagree with you, I think the Beatles is a boy band because some of their early stuff shows especially the commercialism aspect of boy bands."
Jack: "That's wrong, obviously the Beatles isn't a boy band."
Person 1: "That's actually the Jack Fallacy, not a real argument."
Jack: "Anyone who doesn't believe in God is an idiot, there's obviously a God."
Person 2: "the Jack Fallacy."
Jack: "That's wrong, obviously the Beatles isn't a boy band."
Person 1: "That's actually the Jack Fallacy, not a real argument."
Jack: "Anyone who doesn't believe in God is an idiot, there's obviously a God."
Person 2: "the Jack Fallacy."
by TessaSalem November 16, 2012
Get the the Jack Fallacy mug.The truth will have no conceivable defence, where as a fictional narrative can always be confirmed as fallacy.
John: I believe that we can grow our gross revenue 10% over the next six years using this marketing strategy.
Harvey: Well, facts are friendly. until then, fiction is fallacy.
The definition of fact being an absolute truth, where as to define fallacy is to holding a mistaken belief, especially one based on unsound arguments.
Facts are friendly, fiction is fallacy - would be defined as until you have evidence you are unable to make a case against the fallacy of your argument.
Harvey: Well, facts are friendly. until then, fiction is fallacy.
The definition of fact being an absolute truth, where as to define fallacy is to holding a mistaken belief, especially one based on unsound arguments.
Facts are friendly, fiction is fallacy - would be defined as until you have evidence you are unable to make a case against the fallacy of your argument.
by Harrison T French October 20, 2018
Get the Facts are friendly, Fiction is Fallacy mug.