No, you jackass. That's not how it works. What you're doing is what every idiot on the planet does when there's some sort or disagreement. It's the most common modern fallacy. It's not an official fallacy. It's ORIGINAL. UNIQUE. Which is what I do here. ORIGINAL refutations of morden misconceptions.
Hym "Let's call it 'Dismissal from emotion falacy.' Here's how it's works: You use my emotional state or project a negative emotional state (Anger, Jealousy, Fear) on to me for the purposes of dismissing a proposition or statement. It's fallacious (obviously) because my emotional state has has no baring on the truth of my proposition. 2+2=4 regardless of whether or not I'm angery while I tell you that 2+2=4. My emotional state is irrelevant. And by accusing me of 'Jealousy' you're doing the EXACT SAME THING leftist do when they accuse conservatives of being transphobes or homophobes. Protecting 'Fear' on to them for the purpose of dismissing their propositions. There you have it. 'Dismissal from emotion fallacy' that's the thing you're doing. Look for it. You'll see it all the time. People do it all the time."
by Hym Iam April 27, 2023
Get the Dismissal from emotion fallacy mug.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
Get the Nobel Savage Fallacy mug.An illegitimate child between ad hominem (because association fallacy focused on the PERSON or PEOPLE instead of the ARGUMENT), appeal to emotion, hasty generalization, questionable cause fallacy (because "labels" associated to someone or something can determine the degree of "truth"), and red herring (because it deliberately derails the argument)
Association Fallacy has two kinds:
1. Guilt by association
2. Honour by association
Association Fallacy has two kinds:
1. Guilt by association
2. Honour by association
Example of association fallacy:
"You're Neo-Nazi, therefore your argument must be wrong" (Godwin's Law/Reductio ad Hitlerum)
"You are leftist liberal special snowflake, therefore your argument is dismissed" (Red-bait/Red-tag)
"You're the expert, therefore your opinion must be right" (Honour by association)
"You're Neo-Nazi, therefore your argument must be wrong" (Godwin's Law/Reductio ad Hitlerum)
"You are leftist liberal special snowflake, therefore your argument is dismissed" (Red-bait/Red-tag)
"You're the expert, therefore your opinion must be right" (Honour by association)
by Sir. B November 9, 2021
Get the association fallacy mug."Dude, my baby is twice as big in just 3 months, what the hell am I going to do with a 7.5 trillion pound 10 year old?"
"Uhh, logarithmic fallacy, but also like, are you okay man?"
"Uhh, logarithmic fallacy, but also like, are you okay man?"
by onedefinitionderrick March 20, 2025
Get the Logarithmic Fallacy mug.The color red is the best because the Internet said so.
That line of thinking is just a Kevin fallacy!
That line of thinking is just a Kevin fallacy!
by Vihörs February 24, 2024
Get the Kevin fallacy mug.Tucker is also using ad pop as his justification believing that God created humans and that there is a spiritual battle between good and evil.
Tucker "EvErYoNe BeLiEvEd It! Everyone has ALWAYS believed it! Dattebayo!"
Hym "Heheheheheh Dattebayo... No, hey, that's the 'Ad Populum Fallacy.' A large number of people believing something (even historically) is not evidence for the truth of the claim."
Hym "Heheheheheh Dattebayo... No, hey, that's the 'Ad Populum Fallacy.' A large number of people believing something (even historically) is not evidence for the truth of the claim."
by Hym Iam April 23, 2024
Get the Ad Populum Fallacy mug.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
Get the Middle-ground fallacy mug.