12 definitions by ApplesPotatoGardner
To mock a midwit using their own bad logic to make an ironic argument in a way they would, but also in a way where most of them will actually agree lest they expose themselves to the wolves that are the other stupider less-aware midwits.
This works so well, because a vast majority of midwits are on the less-aware end and generally care more about agreeing with something they already agree with especially if many other midwits already agree they all agree with it!
Dissenters to the midwits ideals are thus automatically labeled, "bad" for X emotional, fallacious, or nonsensical reasons. Legitimate refutations of takes or disagreements are labeled as "hit-pieces". Anecdotal experiences with a single person from another disagreeing group automatically means that person and anyone who agrees with them is also "bad", etc. The reason The Midwit Trap works so well is to disagree with your agreeing yet mocking take is to open themselves up to the same "out group bad" mentality they and the others they surround themselves with have. This is The Midwit Trap.
This works so well, because a vast majority of midwits are on the less-aware end and generally care more about agreeing with something they already agree with especially if many other midwits already agree they all agree with it!
Dissenters to the midwits ideals are thus automatically labeled, "bad" for X emotional, fallacious, or nonsensical reasons. Legitimate refutations of takes or disagreements are labeled as "hit-pieces". Anecdotal experiences with a single person from another disagreeing group automatically means that person and anyone who agrees with them is also "bad", etc. The reason The Midwit Trap works so well is to disagree with your agreeing yet mocking take is to open themselves up to the same "out group bad" mentality they and the others they surround themselves with have. This is The Midwit Trap.
An example of executing The Midwit Trap: Responding to a midwit online with "I agree." updoot and all, and then use the most openly blatantly stupid midwit logic they all would use to come to a conclusion that they would actually agree with. The trick here is the argument has to be so openly blatantly stupid/circular/hypocritical that even some of the midwits might notice. The trick here is it will never be the majority of the hivemind so any midwits who actually do notice and call you out, you can just turn around and throw them to the wolves that are the other 90% of midwits who were too dumb to get it. By doing this they will now be labeled as part of the out-group and therefore in the hivemind of the midwits, bad.
by ApplesPotatoGardner October 16, 2023
In politics, a dog whistle is the use of coded or suggestive language in political messaging to garner support from a particular group without provoking opposition. The concept is named after ultrasonic dog whistles, which are audible to dogs but not humans.
Something to be aware of; however, is that it is also a slippery slope fallacy in which bad actors can claim any one thing can also mean another thing without having to explain why logically. The counter to this is to ask them to explain how they came to that conclusion, to which, they won't be able to actually explain why logically.
Equating legitimate generalized statements or criticisms and concerns to hate is generally how the Dog Whistle Slippery Slope Fallacy is abused by bad actors looking to put words or intent in their victim's mouths.
This also leads to a circular logic problem where the person injecting the slippery slope dog whistling racist intent into the meaning of a generalized statement will claim everyone who disagrees with them are bigots, and they know they are bigots because they don't agree with their beliefs, therefore those beliefs are correct because all who disagree with them are bigots.
Something to be aware of; however, is that it is also a slippery slope fallacy in which bad actors can claim any one thing can also mean another thing without having to explain why logically. The counter to this is to ask them to explain how they came to that conclusion, to which, they won't be able to actually explain why logically.
Equating legitimate generalized statements or criticisms and concerns to hate is generally how the Dog Whistle Slippery Slope Fallacy is abused by bad actors looking to put words or intent in their victim's mouths.
This also leads to a circular logic problem where the person injecting the slippery slope dog whistling racist intent into the meaning of a generalized statement will claim everyone who disagrees with them are bigots, and they know they are bigots because they don't agree with their beliefs, therefore those beliefs are correct because all who disagree with them are bigots.
Normie: We need to be tougher on crime!
Wokie: That's a racist dog whistle!
Normie: What about it is racist?
Wokie: You're calling for arresting more inserts racial group(s) here that aren't "white".
Normie: How so?
Wokie: Because you're racist! REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!
Wokie: That's a racist dog whistle!
Normie: What about it is racist?
Wokie: You're calling for arresting more inserts racial group(s) here that aren't "white".
Normie: How so?
Wokie: Because you're racist! REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!
by ApplesPotatoGardner May 14, 2023
A website that was once a gathering place for fun and friendly memes which was completely ruined by botted accounts dedicated to pushing left-wing/leftist political propaganda to the front page for the young user base to see and hopefully indoctrinate. Providing any actual evidence that goes against the hivemind results in being immediately downvoted and banned despite the reason simply having an opinion they don't like regardless of you're evidence against their narrative. The political bot accounts use each others memes and recycle them with small changes and intentionally leave out key facts to push lies and to push the idea that fact checking them itself is an act of evil. Without any actual moderation to stop this, it's become a dystopian nightmare. Almost as if John Oliver himself became a website.
Imgur: Funny cute cat video.
Imgur: Sob Story.
Imgur: Cool trick video.
Imgur: THE CONSTITUTION IS WHY YOUR RIGHTS ARE BEING DESTROYED! THOSE DAMN REPUBLICANS! ALL HEIL MARX!
Imgur: Sob Story.
Imgur: Cool trick video.
Imgur: THE CONSTITUTION IS WHY YOUR RIGHTS ARE BEING DESTROYED! THOSE DAMN REPUBLICANS! ALL HEIL MARX!
by ApplesPotatoGardner March 3, 2023
Some dude who claims to run a business, and keeps using certain buzzwords like "Cash Flow" and "Going big / Take it to the next level" constantly but in reality is learning by the seat of his pants and really has no idea what he is doing. Big dreamer, but lacks direction and knowledge. Not necessarily a bad guy, but that one Youtube video he watched about running a successful business is running through his head on nonstop repeat everyday and he acts like he's going to be a millionaire in the next 9 months.
Business Bro: Once I achieve optimal synergy with positive cash flow energy I'll blow up and go big so I can take it to the next level! Let's do this!
by ApplesPotatoGardner February 4, 2023
by ApplesPotatoGardner December 8, 2020
When you are promised something amazing, and encourage/work/pay to make it happen, but are really numb to the probability that it's inevitably going to be a let down, or not come to fruition at all.
Kickstarter Syndrome defined:
Person A: Did you see the new Kickstarter for Megamanolamarama?
Person B: Yea! I'm already a $100 tier backer!
Person A: Me too! AWESOME!
- Scenario A -
Release day: Person A & B: This game... sucks! Why did we back it again?
-Scenario B-
Person A as an old man: Remember when we gave money to some people online to make something cool we could experience?
Person B as an old man: Yea we were stupid back then weren't we?
Person A: Did you see the new Kickstarter for Megamanolamarama?
Person B: Yea! I'm already a $100 tier backer!
Person A: Me too! AWESOME!
- Scenario A -
Release day: Person A & B: This game... sucks! Why did we back it again?
-Scenario B-
Person A as an old man: Remember when we gave money to some people online to make something cool we could experience?
Person B as an old man: Yea we were stupid back then weren't we?
by ApplesPotatoGardner July 26, 2016
The Midwit Paradox is a phenomenon where a midwit or group of midwits cannot understand an out groups arguments, because they can't spot fallacious arguments that they and their own in group makes. How can anyone expect them to understand out group concepts & ideas when they can't spot the most blatant and openly fallacious mistakes of their own ideas?
Example of The Midwit Paradox:
Midwit: Significant disparities between racial groups can only be indicative of environmental or genetic reasons, and that any environmental factor must be racism!
Rationalist: That's a black & white fallacy. That is erroneous because many environmental factors such as culture, religion, and the differing traditional values, or various nuances that come with them are based on free choice. Anyone spouting what you are arguing via reductio ad absurdum would be forced to conclude that free will is somehow racist... which is ridiculous.
Midwit: No it's not, you're just rambling nonsense! The experts agree with me! That's not the consensus! SOUUUURRRCEEE? You're bad and a newtsee! Anyone else who agrees with you is also bad and a newtsee/boogeyman! REEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!
Rationalist: *Facepalm*
Midwit: Significant disparities between racial groups can only be indicative of environmental or genetic reasons, and that any environmental factor must be racism!
Rationalist: That's a black & white fallacy. That is erroneous because many environmental factors such as culture, religion, and the differing traditional values, or various nuances that come with them are based on free choice. Anyone spouting what you are arguing via reductio ad absurdum would be forced to conclude that free will is somehow racist... which is ridiculous.
Midwit: No it's not, you're just rambling nonsense! The experts agree with me! That's not the consensus! SOUUUURRRCEEE? You're bad and a newtsee! Anyone else who agrees with you is also bad and a newtsee/boogeyman! REEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!
Rationalist: *Facepalm*
by ApplesPotatoGardner October 18, 2023