When you make a comparison between two things and the person you're tries to argue that you're trying to claim that there is a moral equivalence between one of the things you're talking about and the comparison.
Iam "Fallacy of moral equivalence is such a lazy argument. I'm not saying that you are like Jesus and you're fans are like lepers. What I'm saying is this: Sometimes, in life, we can't always be for people what they want (or even need) us to be. And I see that it pains you a great deal. And that's ok. And I can relate to that. Not because I'm like Jesus..."
Hym "But because I'm better than Jesus. Like, 2 maybe 3 times better. At least. I'm obviously not a filthy leper. If that were the comparison I were making than I would OBVIOUSLY be God because I'm the one watching the thing happened. But then I would be a filthy abomination..."
Iam "I wasn't fin..."
Hym "You were finished. I doubt you even had a point."
Iam "I was going to say that I understand the feeling and that you shouldn't be so hard on yourself. I think back on my life and can see that if I changed maybe 3 things everything would be so radically different that I wouldn't even be the same entity. So, if the present is the future's past, you don't really have to do all that much. Just 3 things."
Hym "That's the problem with the rest of these morons. They're trying to do too much. And they're obnoxious. And they don't give me enough of their things. Everyone needs to give me their things. I need them more than they do."
Hym "But because I'm better than Jesus. Like, 2 maybe 3 times better. At least. I'm obviously not a filthy leper. If that were the comparison I were making than I would OBVIOUSLY be God because I'm the one watching the thing happened. But then I would be a filthy abomination..."
Iam "I wasn't fin..."
Hym "You were finished. I doubt you even had a point."
Iam "I was going to say that I understand the feeling and that you shouldn't be so hard on yourself. I think back on my life and can see that if I changed maybe 3 things everything would be so radically different that I wouldn't even be the same entity. So, if the present is the future's past, you don't really have to do all that much. Just 3 things."
Hym "That's the problem with the rest of these morons. They're trying to do too much. And they're obnoxious. And they don't give me enough of their things. Everyone needs to give me their things. I need them more than they do."
by Hym Iam April 7, 2022
Get the Fallacy of moral equivalence mug.Abstract: For every lucky/unlucky event you experience, you will experience an unlucky/lucky even of similar magnitude in the future.
The Hypothesis of Equivalent Exchange is a theoritical phenomenon where, whenever something or someone experiences a lucky event, they will experience an unlucky event of similar magnitude in the near future, and vice versa.
The Hypothesis of Equivalent Exchange is connected to gambler's fallacy, where the latter is essentially an over-reliance on the former. This does not mean the Law IS gambler's fallacy; one is merely a stated hypothesis, the other is a mistake on the user's end.
The Hypothesis holds some physical value objectively. In most of society, if you do something bad to get something good (the lucky event), you will get caught and punished (the unlucky event). Additionally, going through hardship (the unlucky event) makes you work harder, thus making your future better (the lucky event). Of course, this is merely a hypothesis; inaccuracies are bound to happen.
The Hypothesis of Equivalent Exchange is a theoritical phenomenon where, whenever something or someone experiences a lucky event, they will experience an unlucky event of similar magnitude in the near future, and vice versa.
The Hypothesis of Equivalent Exchange is connected to gambler's fallacy, where the latter is essentially an over-reliance on the former. This does not mean the Law IS gambler's fallacy; one is merely a stated hypothesis, the other is a mistake on the user's end.
The Hypothesis holds some physical value objectively. In most of society, if you do something bad to get something good (the lucky event), you will get caught and punished (the unlucky event). Additionally, going through hardship (the unlucky event) makes you work harder, thus making your future better (the lucky event). Of course, this is merely a hypothesis; inaccuracies are bound to happen.
"Did you hear how Little Timmy got into a car accident the other day? Apparently, his insurance paid him mad stacks after a bit of lawyering up on his end; the Hypothesis of Equivalent Exchange really saved him there."
by asdffrfrnocap November 8, 2025
Get the Hypothesis of Equivalent Exchange mug.The stronger fallacy of claiming that two positions are equivalent because both challenge some form of consensus, ignoring vast differences in evidence, reasoning, and scientific support. The flat Earth equivalence fallacy asserts that believing in climate change is like believing the Earth is flat because both "go against the mainstream," or that questioning vaccine safety is like questioning gravity because both involve skepticism. The fallacy ignores that skepticism is not a binary; it's a matter of evidence. Some consensus views are supported by overwhelming evidence; others are not. Equating them based on the formal similarity of "questioning consensus" is intellectually lazy and rhetorically manipulative. The equivalence fallacy is beloved of false balance journalism and concern trolling.
Flat Earth Equivalence Fallacy Example: "The pundit committed the flat Earth equivalence fallacy, saying that climate scientists were like flat Earthers because both were 'certain' about their views. The equivalence ignored that one certainty was backed by decades of research and global consensus, the other by YouTube videos and wishful thinking. False equivalence had replaced honest comparison."
by Abzugal Nammugal Enkigal February 16, 2026
Get the Flat Earth Equivalence Fallacy mug.The stronger fallacy of claiming that any questioning of vaccine policy is equivalent to being anti-vaccine, or that all vaccine-hesitant positions are equally baseless. The anti-vaccine equivalence fallacy erases important distinctions—between those who reject all vaccines and those with specific concerns, between those who are misinformed and those who are persuadable, between questions asked in good faith and propaganda spread in bad faith. By treating all deviation from consensus as equivalent, the fallacy prevents nuanced discussion, alienates potential allies, and actually strengthens the most extreme positions by lumping them with moderate concerns. The equivalence fallacy is beloved of activists who prefer condemnation to conversation, and of those who find it easier to stigmatize than to persuade.
Anti-vaccine Equivalence Fallacy Example: "The health official committed the anti-vaccine equivalence fallacy, saying that anyone with questions about the new vaccine was 'just like the anti-vaxxers.' Parents with genuine concerns felt dismissed and became harder to reach. The fallacy had created the very resistance it claimed to fight. Nuance was the casualty."
by Abzugal Nammugal Enkigal February 16, 2026
Get the Anti-vaccine Equivalence Fallacy mug.