The common mistaken belief that all people who drive Subarus are gay, just because all lesbians drive Subarus.
Christie: Hey Joe, you're a flaming homosexual because of those navy blue briefs! Steve: No way. I'm an expert on men's underwear. Like Rick from Pawn Stars calls me when he has questions. This js just a classic example of The Subaru Fallacy!
by C Chaotic November 08, 2020
Christie: hey Joe you're clearly a flaming homosexual because of those burnt orange briefs. Steve: No way! I'm an expert on men's underwear. Like Rick from Pawn Stars calls me when he has questions. This is a classic example of the Subaru Fallacy!
by C Chaotic November 08, 2020
Nobel Savage Fallacy (not to be confused with the Noble Savage Myth) is an error in reasoning by which incidental commonalities between modern scientific theory/technology and ancient cultural expressions are claimed to support a conclusion that the ancients must have had access to modern knowledge.
The fallacy is usually committed by those with an at best shallow understanding of either modern science, ancient cultures, or - frequently - both.
It is commonly committed by those seeking to bolster the foundations of their modern cultural hegemony by arguing that the purported central tenets of its ancient precursors were rationally developed, and any deviations from those traditional norms are movement away from the ostensibly scientific ideal.
It is also frequently deployed by charlatans attempting to sell products or services derived from ancient techniques, who wish to gain a veneer of scientific plausibility for their offerings - that they in no way deserve.
The fallacy is usually committed by those with an at best shallow understanding of either modern science, ancient cultures, or - frequently - both.
It is commonly committed by those seeking to bolster the foundations of their modern cultural hegemony by arguing that the purported central tenets of its ancient precursors were rationally developed, and any deviations from those traditional norms are movement away from the ostensibly scientific ideal.
It is also frequently deployed by charlatans attempting to sell products or services derived from ancient techniques, who wish to gain a veneer of scientific plausibility for their offerings - that they in no way deserve.
"No, dude, those symbols do not mean they had spaceships, even if they look a little bit like that rocket Bezos made - mistaking what is obviously a poorly-drawn penis for a spacecraft is just the Nobel Savage Fallacy!"
"Babe, Gwenyth can say whatever she likes - but stuffing that crystal up your coochie is not gonna cure anything, even if the Biddelonians have been doing it for centuries... yes, I've heard of phototherapy, but that crystal isn't gonna refract any light up there, it's just another Nobel Savage Fallacy!"
"Babe, Gwenyth can say whatever she likes - but stuffing that crystal up your coochie is not gonna cure anything, even if the Biddelonians have been doing it for centuries... yes, I've heard of phototherapy, but that crystal isn't gonna refract any light up there, it's just another Nobel Savage Fallacy!"
by Umlimo April 19, 2022
When someone in an argument argues the semantics of a word/phrase, rather than making a retort against the other person's argument.
Person 1: No lolis aren't children, they're actually young-looking women.
Person 2: Nice Vaush-Goblin Fallacy loser
Person 2: Nice Vaush-Goblin Fallacy loser
by goblinski May 08, 2024
Making an assumption that, since there are REASONS WHY some thing exists, therefore that thing does NOT exist.
Rashaan: The "gender gap in pay" is a myth! The fact is that women CHOOSE lower paying jobs so they can spend more time with their family.
Han: So, the fact that women make less money than men is false, because there is a reason women make less money than men? Look out, big brain time! Sounds like you've committed the Dingus Fallacy.
Han: So, the fact that women make less money than men is false, because there is a reason women make less money than men? Look out, big brain time! Sounds like you've committed the Dingus Fallacy.
by alienacean October 29, 2020
The mistaken belief that the truth lies somewhere in between to opposing propositions.
Man "It's the women!"
Woman "It's the men!"
Sophist "Well... *Insert middle-ground fallacy*"
Hym "Wrong! I can prove it! By asking a simple question: What is the selection criteria? If it is 6ft tall (14.5%), Six figure salary (17%), 6 inch+ dick (16%) and we omit overlap and assume women are willing to settle for 1 out of the 3, we have only 47% of men who can meet the selection criteria. If THAT is what constitutes 'The best man available' (in the context of hypergamy) AND if we assume that Jordan is correct in saying that they should all just get married and start a family, What are the OTHER 53% of women supposed to do? For that to work, over HALF the women STILL have to CHANGE THEIR SELECTION CRITERIA. What then? How is that supposed to work? The women don't WANT to do it and are TOLD NOT TO BY PARENTS WHO WANT THEM TO HAVE THE BEST PARTNER AVAILABLE. The men who have overlapping qualities don't have to do it so their opinions are unlimited. And here we are...
Man "It's the women!"
Woman "It's the men!"
Sophist "Well... *Insert middle-ground fallacy*"
Hym "Wrong! I can prove it! By asking a simple question: What is the selection criteria? If it is 6ft tall (14.5%), Six figure salary (17%), 6 inch+ dick (16%) and we omit overlap and assume women are willing to settle for 1 out of the 3, we have only 47% of men who can meet the selection criteria. If THAT is what constitutes 'The best man available' (in the context of hypergamy) AND if we assume that Jordan is correct in saying that they should all just get married and start a family, What are the OTHER 53% of women supposed to do? For that to work, over HALF the women STILL have to CHANGE THEIR SELECTION CRITERIA. What then? How is that supposed to work? The women don't WANT to do it and are TOLD NOT TO BY PARENTS WHO WANT THEM TO HAVE THE BEST PARTNER AVAILABLE. The men who have overlapping qualities don't have to do it so their opinions are unlimited. And here we are...
What can men do about any of that? 'Try your best!'? 'Strife nobly into the dawn!'?Only 17% of the men CAN have jobs that pay 6 figures or more because THERE ARE A FINITE NUMBER OF JOBS THAT PAY THAT MUCH. What, do you expect them to increase the pay rate of a broader number of job to 6 figures? McDonald's cashier 100,000 a year. Then you can finally get a girlfriend. The other 2 are a roll of the dice. How is it at all men's fault? What is the selection criteria? Broadly? And that middle-ground fallacy applies to the schizophrenia thing too! It's not a matter of 'well, maybe it's a little of both'. At this point it's 'yeah, they're doing the thing they are doing and they have been doing it for years, and now I'm hyper-vigilant about it so I'm looking for it everywhere!' I don't claim to be right all of the time about it. And as a thought experiment I respond to things as though they were said to or about me. But that's not the same!"
by Hym Iam February 27, 2023
"When one tries to ask a question or make an observation and another party immediately accuses them of being part of an unrelated discredited group."
"Hey, I think the government might be cloud-seeding."
"Are you a flat-Earther too?"
"Don't hit me with that Sidecar Fallacy BS... I've seen the patents!"
"Are you a flat-Earther too?"
"Don't hit me with that Sidecar Fallacy BS... I've seen the patents!"
by TooLateBlue July 10, 2023