(idea) by anomie Tue May 30 2000 at 5:31:14
A logical fallacy in which an explanation is given for some phenomenon, but the evidence for the phenomenon is invalid (fake, exaggerated, whatever. See the other logical fallacies).

Example: "The reason he got the highest score on the SAT was that he went through our program." The 5 people who scored better were dismissed as special cases.

To prove the fallacy, show that the evidence for the phenomenon is invalid.

del.icio.us Facebook Digg StumbleUpon Reddit (I like it!)
Y'know, if you log in, you can write something here, or contact authors directly on the site. Create a New User if you don't already have an account.