RationalWiki's 2019 Fundraiser

There is no RationalWiki without you. We are a small non-profit with no staff – we are hundreds of volunteers who document pseudoscience and crankery around the world every day. We will never allow ads because we must remain independent. We cannot rely on big donors with corresponding big agendas. We are not the largest website around, but we believe we play an important role in defending truth and objectivity.

If everyone who saw this today donated $5, we would meet our goal for 2019.

Fighting pseudoscience isn't free.
We are 100% user-supported! Help and donate $5, $20 or whatever you can today with PayPal Logo.png!

Donations so far: $3220Goal: $6000

Suppressed correlative

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Part of the series on
Logic and rhetoric
Icon logic.svg
Key articles
General logic
Bad logic

Suppressed correlative or lost contrast is a semantic logical fallacy in which the arguer attempts to redefine two contrasting terms in such a way that one encompasses the other. As such, it is a form of straw man argument.


Opponent: "All things are either X or not X."
Response: "I define X in such a way that all things you say are not X are included in X."

It should be noted that even if the definition used to redefine X is a more technically correct definition, it is still this fallacy, because it is still an attempt to avoid the opponent's actual argument which is based around two contrasting possibilities.


  • This is commonly used in debates about whether things are "art"; the question "is it art?" requires some possibility that something might not be art. The common response, that art is defined as an ineffable quality or a method of human expression, removes any possibility that something created by humans could not be classified as art, and therefore cannot possibly be addressing the opponent's actual argument.
  • Often used in attempts to classify science or atheism as religious beliefs; the substitute definition of "religion" will typically be so broad that almost any human association would qualify as a religion.
  • "I don't view humanity as the same species because we're not all the same" - Stefan Molyneux.[1]

External links[edit]