The fallacy of suppressed correlative is a type of argument that tries to redefine a correlative (one of two mutually exclusive options) so that one alternative encompasses the other, i.e. making one alternative impossible. This has also been known as the fallacy of lost contrast and the fallacy of the suppressed relative.
A conceptual example:
Alternatively Person 2 can redefine X in way that instead concludes all things are not X.
A simple exam...
More
Read article at Wikipedia
Suppressed correlative
We can tell you that Suppressed correlative is a
If you know more about Suppressed correlative, you can add more facts here »
Similar topics in Freebase
-
False dilemma
A false dilemma (also called false dichotomy, the either-or fallacy, fallacy of false choice, black-and-white thinking, or the fallacy of exhaustive hypotheses) is a type of logical fallacy that involves a situation in which only two alternatives are considered, when in fact there is at least one... -
Naturalistic fallacy
The phrase naturalistic fallacy, with "fallacy" referring to a formal fallacy, has several meanings. It can be used to refer to the claim that what is natural is inherently good or right, and that what is unnatural is bad or wrong (see also "appeal to nature"). This naturalistic fallacy is the... -
Fallacy of the undistributed middle
The fallacy of the undistributed middle is a logical fallacy, and more specifically a formal fallacy, that is committed when the middle term in a categorical syllogism is not distributed in either the minor premise or the major premise. It is thus a syllogistic fallacy. In classical syllogisms, all... -
Homunculus argument
The homunculus argument is a fallacy arising most commonly in the theory of vision. One may explain (human) vision by noting that light from the outside world forms an image on the retinas in the eyes and something (or someone) in the brain looks at these images as if they are images on a movie... -
If-by-whiskey
In political discourse, if-by-whiskey is a relativist fallacy where the response to a question is contingent on the questioner's opinions and use of words with strong positive or negative connotations (e.g., terrorist as negative and freedom fighter as positive). An if-by-whiskey argument...