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 13, 2023
Get the Dog Whistle mug.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 17, 2023
Get the The Midwit Paradox mug.The Opportunistic Racist follows the same mantra as the Preferential Racist, but is completely self aware of the hypocrisy and doesn't care since their goals are to weaponize grievances in a "rules for thee, but not for me" fashion. The Opportunistic Racist will use tactics such as cry bullying, tu quoque, misdirection, gaslighting, etc to paint their opposition in a bad light. However, they would do any of those same exact same things themselves and not see it as a problem. It's a form of projection, and a weaponization against their opponents of their preferential racism and hatred. They are essentially a more directly malicious version of the Preferential Racist. It is not uncommon to see these people as full time Grievance Grifters / Race Hustlers.
See Preferential Racist
See Crybully / Cry Bully
See Preferential Racist
See Crybully / Cry Bully
Opportunistic Racist: You need to pronounce Serra Heideonslanik's name properly! You don't care enough to pronounce it correctly, because you're racist!
Opportunistic Racist a week earlier: Steve Willawollabingbang is an idiot and I hope he get's hit by a car! How could anyone have given him that position?! (Actual name: Steve Williams)
Opportunistic Racist a week earlier: Steve Willawollabingbang is an idiot and I hope he get's hit by a car! How could anyone have given him that position?! (Actual name: Steve Williams)
by ApplesPotatoGardner November 21, 2023
Get the Opportunistic Racist mug.Answer Erosion (noun)
A logical fallacy in which a person repeatedly asks increasingly difficult or detailed questions to undermine the validity of earlier correct answers. The goal is to gradually discredit the original responses, despite them being accurate, by introducing new and higher standards of inquiry that were not present when the answers were first given. This tactic can also be used to distract from or avoid addressing the original point being contested.
A logical fallacy in which a person repeatedly asks increasingly difficult or detailed questions to undermine the validity of earlier correct answers. The goal is to gradually discredit the original responses, despite them being accurate, by introducing new and higher standards of inquiry that were not present when the answers were first given. This tactic can also be used to distract from or avoid addressing the original point being contested.
Example:
Person A: "The capital of France is Paris."
Person B: "But what’s the population of Paris? Can you tell me the exact area of Paris? What about the history of Paris in the 18th century?"
Person A: "Well, I didn’t give all those details, but the answer is still correct."
Person B: "Ah, but you didn’t really know the full story, did you?"
In this example, Person B uses Answer Erosion not only to undermine Person A's correct response by raising the bar with more complex questions but also to shift the focus away from the original, simple fact (the capital of France), effectively distracting from the main point.
Person A: "The capital of France is Paris."
Person B: "But what’s the population of Paris? Can you tell me the exact area of Paris? What about the history of Paris in the 18th century?"
Person A: "Well, I didn’t give all those details, but the answer is still correct."
Person B: "Ah, but you didn’t really know the full story, did you?"
In this example, Person B uses Answer Erosion not only to undermine Person A's correct response by raising the bar with more complex questions but also to shift the focus away from the original, simple fact (the capital of France), effectively distracting from the main point.
by ApplesPotatoGardner December 24, 2024
Get the Answer Erosion mug.This type of fallacy is a mix of the "hasty generalization" fallacy and the "association fallacy."
Village Idiot Fallacy: This fallacy occurs when Person A highlights a foolish argument made by Person B and criticizes it. Person A then wrongly assumes that anyone remotely associated with Person B also holds the same foolish belief. This fallacy is often applied to entire groups, especially in online discourse. The term "Village Idiot Fallacy" comes from the idea of pointing to the village idiot and then assuming the entire village shares his beliefs, illustrating guilt by association.
Hasty Generalization: This fallacy occurs when someone makes a broad generalization based on a small or unrepresentative sample. (Person A is making a generalization about a group of people based on the beliefs or actions of one individual, the "village idiot.")
Association Fallacy (Guilt by Association): This occurs when someone asserts that qualities of one thing are inherently qualities of another, merely by an irrelevant association. (Person A is claiming that the whole group shares the same beliefs and qualities of the "village idiot" simply because they are associated with him.)
Combining these concepts this is how "The Village Idiot Fallacy" manifests itself.
Village Idiot Fallacy: This fallacy occurs when Person A highlights a foolish argument made by Person B and criticizes it. Person A then wrongly assumes that anyone remotely associated with Person B also holds the same foolish belief. This fallacy is often applied to entire groups, especially in online discourse. The term "Village Idiot Fallacy" comes from the idea of pointing to the village idiot and then assuming the entire village shares his beliefs, illustrating guilt by association.
Hasty Generalization: This fallacy occurs when someone makes a broad generalization based on a small or unrepresentative sample. (Person A is making a generalization about a group of people based on the beliefs or actions of one individual, the "village idiot.")
Association Fallacy (Guilt by Association): This occurs when someone asserts that qualities of one thing are inherently qualities of another, merely by an irrelevant association. (Person A is claiming that the whole group shares the same beliefs and qualities of the "village idiot" simply because they are associated with him.)
Combining these concepts this is how "The Village Idiot Fallacy" manifests itself.
The Village Idiot Fallacy Example:
Person A: "Person B didn't recycle their plastic bottle after lunch. Can you believe that?"
Person A (later): "People from that apartment complex are so irresponsible. They're all like Person B, not caring about the environment at all."
Person A: "Person B didn't recycle their plastic bottle after lunch. Can you believe that?"
Person A (later): "People from that apartment complex are so irresponsible. They're all like Person B, not caring about the environment at all."
by ApplesPotatoGardner July 09, 2024
Get the The Village Idiot Fallacy mug.Woke progessive leftist, and current podcaster on Youtube. He created and hosted the half-hour truTV show Adam Ruins Everything, based on the CollegeHumor series of the same name.
Adam has faced significant criticism for being perceived as entrenched in a 'woke' ideology, leading to accusations of science denialism. Critics argue that he selectively chooses experts, distorts data, and promotes a form of "science worship" while maintaining an appearance of objectivity. Despite asserting the factual basis of his views, he is accused of neglecting dissenting evidence and failing to withstand scrutiny, as demonstrated during his appearance on the Joe Rogan show where his ideology quickly unraveled. Instead of engaging in open debate, he is seen hosting a podcast that serves as a platform for reinforcing woke ideologies among the like-minded, akin to a Sunday church meeting.
Adam has faced significant criticism for being perceived as entrenched in a 'woke' ideology, leading to accusations of science denialism. Critics argue that he selectively chooses experts, distorts data, and promotes a form of "science worship" while maintaining an appearance of objectivity. Despite asserting the factual basis of his views, he is accused of neglecting dissenting evidence and failing to withstand scrutiny, as demonstrated during his appearance on the Joe Rogan show where his ideology quickly unraveled. Instead of engaging in open debate, he is seen hosting a podcast that serves as a platform for reinforcing woke ideologies among the like-minded, akin to a Sunday church meeting.
Regular Guy #1: Did you see Adam Conover ruined billionaires?
Regular Guy #2: Doesn't that dude have like 100 million dollars?
Regular Guy #1: Only people who are richer than him are automatically bad, as is anyone who disagrees with his ideas.
Regular Guy #2: Classic woke lefty cultist behavior.
Regular Guy #2: Doesn't that dude have like 100 million dollars?
Regular Guy #1: Only people who are richer than him are automatically bad, as is anyone who disagrees with his ideas.
Regular Guy #2: Classic woke lefty cultist behavior.
by ApplesPotatoGardner December 30, 2023
Get the Adam Conover mug.The idea that introducing or accepting a single paradox means introducing and accepting an infinite amount of subsequent other paradoxes, because of the first paradox.
The main take away here is you don't want to introduce any paradoxes to a line of reasoning or any model, because you'll have to also by proxy also accept an infinite amount of other paradoxes that are thus created by the first one as a consequence.
The main take away here is you don't want to introduce any paradoxes to a line of reasoning or any model, because you'll have to also by proxy also accept an infinite amount of other paradoxes that are thus created by the first one as a consequence.
Paradoxical Domino Effect Example #1: God exists therefore any other god could also exist. Since God exists so could faeries, werewolves, vampires, Big Foot, and The Loch Ness monster. Since faeries could exist as a consequence of this, magic also must exist since they use magic.
Paradoxical Domino Effect Example #2: Going back in time is possible; therefore, you can go back in time and kill your own grandpa so you couldn't be born. Since you can't be born you must not exist. Since you no longer exist... wait what if going back in time is actually just a copy of the past you are going into? So there must be infinite pasts you can go into. Since there are infinite pasts you can go into...
Paradoxical Domino Effect Example #2: Going back in time is possible; therefore, you can go back in time and kill your own grandpa so you couldn't be born. Since you can't be born you must not exist. Since you no longer exist... wait what if going back in time is actually just a copy of the past you are going into? So there must be infinite pasts you can go into. Since there are infinite pasts you can go into...
by ApplesPotatoGardner November 18, 2023
Get the Paradoxical Domino Effect mug.