trustme.bro/r/…
✓ checked
trust me, bro:
here is the receipt.
the claim
There is a recognized informal fallacy for the misuse of informal fallacies.
the verdict
SUPPORTED
the evidence backs this
refutedsupported
the weight of evidence
2 sources for · 0 against
AS REPORTEDno primary record reached; this is what the reporting says

Reference material notes that informal logic includes variants designating the misuse of certain principles, such as misleading vividness.

Evidence for · 2
cited by 0
variants of the standard list of fallacies (“misleading vividness” designating the misuse of vivid anecdotal ... but are at the same time, members of a broader family of informal logics that adopt the fallacy approach ... = {B,L, A ,S,T}, where: B = Fallacy Theory, and T = a set of fallacies used to judge instances of argument ...
See more details
The analysis

rails:sufficiency:supported:single_source:for=1+1p:against=0+0p | v55:sufficiency | v55:coherence_repaired:what=summary

More for · 1
cited by 0
statement unqualified to the statement qualified). It is a type of informal fallacy that occurs when the arguer omits the fact that a statement applies with Secundum quid (comes from the Latin "a dicto simpliciter ad dictum secundum quid", meaning "[what is true] in a certain respect and [what is true] absolutely" or "from the statement unqualified to the statement qualified). It is a type of informal fallacy that occurs when the arguer omits the fact that a statement applies with qualifications or exceptions, or fails to recognize the difference betw Secundum quid (comes from the Latin "a dicto simpliciter ad dictum secundum quid", meaning "[what is true] in a certain respect and [what is true] absolutely" or "from the statement unqualified to the statement qualified). It is a type of informal fallacy that occurs when the arguer omits the fact that a statement applies with qualifications or exceptions, or fails to recognize the difference between rules of thumb (soft generalizations, heuristics that hold true as a general rule but leave room for exceptions) and categorical propositions, rules that hold true universally. Since it ignores the limits, or qualifications, of rules of thumb, this fallacy is also named ignoring qualifications or sweeping generalizations. The expression misuse of a principle can be used as well.
Everything we examined (2)
This check searched the claim as stated. It did not run a separate search for evidence against it.
  1. Informal Logicreferenceno side taken
  2. Secundum quidreferenceno side taken
This receipt carries no identity, shared or not. Sharing publishes your connection to it, not your data.
Check your own claim
Challenge the receipt
trust me, bro: win the argument, pass the class, survive peer review.
This receipt is an automated verdict against our published method · not an opinion about any author or publication.
Terms · Privacy · How verdicts work · Dispute this receipt