Argument used to excuse the harm done by one’s actions due to them being only a small part of a large problem.
‘It’s just one bottle cap I tossed man, this city isn’t a dump just cause of me.’
‘Bro, that’s a litterers fallacy.’
‘Bro, that’s a litterers fallacy.’
by HeightAdvantage December 13, 2020
Get the Litterers fallacy mug.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.The Conservative belief that the majority agree with their opinion, particularly because of ratings on a social media post.
Generally this occurs on left-leaning social media posts, where the majority of the received feedback is from conservative users.
Typically the smaller, conservative group tend to base their beliefs around hatred, and thus feel the need to give overwhelming negative feedback to assert dominance and protect their sensitive egos. The actual majority however, tends to be made up of people who don't care, or are intelligent enough not to argue with idiots.
Generally this occurs on left-leaning social media posts, where the majority of the received feedback is from conservative users.
Typically the smaller, conservative group tend to base their beliefs around hatred, and thus feel the need to give overwhelming negative feedback to assert dominance and protect their sensitive egos. The actual majority however, tends to be made up of people who don't care, or are intelligent enough not to argue with idiots.
Post: "Donald Trump has a bad spray tan and says a lot of stupid things."
Person 1: Why does that post have more dislikes than likes? Everything about it is completely true.
Person 2: Oh don't mind that, it's just from a bunch of cultists using the Conservative Rating Fallacy.
Person 1: Why does that post have more dislikes than likes? Everything about it is completely true.
Person 2: Oh don't mind that, it's just from a bunch of cultists using the Conservative Rating Fallacy.
by I Chose To Speak Facts May 20, 2021
Get the Conservative Rating Fallacy mug.by Mal Adjusted October 1, 2024
Get the Phallusy Fallacy mug.by Big eggd December 5, 2024
Get the Composite rex Fallacy mug.by Big eggd December 5, 2024
Get the Heavenly rex fallacy mug.