Extended Analogy
This page needs some cleaning up to be presentable. Not so much cleanup as bulking-up -- there's almost nothing on this page; compared to what we have on other logical fallacies, it's skimpy. |
The Extended Analogy fallacy is committed when, while arguing a general rule, a comparison is made between a single aspect of two situations, and a reply treats it as a claim the two are directly analogous to each other. For example:
"I do not support the use of cracks to bypass copy protection, regardless of my opposition to copy protection. I believe it is always wrong to oppose the law by breaking it." |
(Also an example of Appeal to Worse Problems)
This page needs a better description. You can help this wiki by expanding or clarifying the information given. |