My personal definition for the general case of that is the ‘Humpty Dumpty Fallacy’ from Alice in Wonderland
‘And only ONE for birthday presents, you know. There’s glory for you!’
I don’t know what you mean by “glory,”′ Alice said.
Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously. ‘Of course you don’t—till I tell you. I meant “there’s a nice knock-down argument for you!”’
‘But “glory” doesn’t mean “a nice knock-down argument,”’ Alice objected.
‘When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less.’
Catchy Fallacy name fallacy seems to me to be a special case of that, which is in turn (to My mind) a special case of Equivocation (Using two different but accurate definitions as if they were identical). Except of course in Humpty Dumpty you’re using an inaccurate or vaguely defined definition, rather than an accurate one.
Just a thought—Jonnan
Edit: I once heard the same thought called, in quite formal tone, “The Spaniards Observation” in reference to The Princess Bride -
Inigo Montoya: “You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.”
Evil Mirror JGWeissman asserts that you have committed the Correspondence Bias, though he offers no explanation, because he can’t, as you have not even talked about the relative effects of circumstances and personality on a person’s behavior.
But if you believe that his commission of the Catchy Fallacy Name Fallacy is a special case of Equivocation, then what two different but accurate definitions is he equivocating?
I’m not entirely sure I understand your Correspondence Bias assertion, since I have made no actual assertions regarding whether the use of such vague definitions implied anything about someones personality. I certainly have my opinions on such, but they are irrelevant to the topic on hand.
That said—I’m not certain that what I title the Humpty Dumpty fallacy is a special case of Equivocation. Equivocation is typically defined as using two accurate definition as if they are interchangable, while Humpty Dumpty tends to use an inaccurate or vague definition as if it were perfectly interchangeable with the accurate and agreed upon definition.
They are obvious close relations, and I think there is a strong case to be made for it, but that is the difference between “Seems to Me” that such is the case and “Is” the case—I was merely putting it forward for consideration.
Please say Hi to Bizarro Jonnan for me, and tell him me hates him so much.
My personal definition for the general case of that is the ‘Humpty Dumpty Fallacy’ from Alice in Wonderland
Catchy Fallacy name fallacy seems to me to be a special case of that, which is in turn (to My mind) a special case of Equivocation (Using two different but accurate definitions as if they were identical). Except of course in Humpty Dumpty you’re using an inaccurate or vaguely defined definition, rather than an accurate one.
Just a thought—Jonnan
Edit: I once heard the same thought called, in quite formal tone, “The Spaniards Observation” in reference to The Princess Bride -
just so.
Evil Mirror JGWeissman asserts that you have committed the Correspondence Bias, though he offers no explanation, because he can’t, as you have not even talked about the relative effects of circumstances and personality on a person’s behavior.
But if you believe that his commission of the Catchy Fallacy Name Fallacy is a special case of Equivocation, then what two different but accurate definitions is he equivocating?
I’m not entirely sure I understand your Correspondence Bias assertion, since I have made no actual assertions regarding whether the use of such vague definitions implied anything about someones personality. I certainly have my opinions on such, but they are irrelevant to the topic on hand.
That said—I’m not certain that what I title the Humpty Dumpty fallacy is a special case of Equivocation. Equivocation is typically defined as using two accurate definition as if they are interchangable, while Humpty Dumpty tends to use an inaccurate or vague definition as if it were perfectly interchangeable with the accurate and agreed upon definition.
They are obvious close relations, and I think there is a strong case to be made for it, but that is the difference between “Seems to Me” that such is the case and “Is” the case—I was merely putting it forward for consideration.
Please say Hi to Bizarro Jonnan for me, and tell him me hates him so much.
Thank—Jonnan