If you call someone an absolute botatron it means that the are too good to be true and are an absolutely a class person to be around.
by Lethal con October 21, 2022
Get the Absolute botatron mug.
An Absolute Carrot is someone who isn't completely tone-deaf, stupid, and arrogant; yet is just tone-deaf, stupid, and arrogant enough to be agitating to others around them. These types of people are just discrete enough to the point where most people who actually interact with them understand they are deeply flawed, however, everyone else thinks that they are a great guy.
Mike: I have no clue why everyone invited Steven to come to Applebees with us, he told a 9/11 joke to the waitress.
Jeremy: Did he really do that? On September 10th? What an Absolute Carrot!
Jeremy: Did he really do that? On September 10th? What an Absolute Carrot!
by EliTried December 21, 2021
Get the Absolute Carrot mug.by Steenmachine December 24, 2021
Get the Absolutely Jacked mug.A very large, obese cat.
In order for a fat cat to be considered an absolute unit, it must NOT be of a breed that is naturally very large in size (ex. a Maine Coon).
An orange cat that weighs 25 lbs = Absolute Unit
A Maine Coon that weighs 25 lbs = NOT an Absolute Unit
In order for a fat cat to be considered an absolute unit, it must NOT be of a breed that is naturally very large in size (ex. a Maine Coon).
An orange cat that weighs 25 lbs = Absolute Unit
A Maine Coon that weighs 25 lbs = NOT an Absolute Unit
by Ubeenbamboozledson April 5, 2022
Get the Absolute Unit mug.by Tc_goldie December 2, 2020
Get the absolute monkey 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.