Harmless supernova fallacy


by Eliezer Yudkowsky Jan 30 2017 updated Feb 16 2018

False dichotomies and continuum fallacies which can be used to argue that anything, including a supernova, must be harmless.

[summary: "Harmless supernova" fallacies are arguments that can equally be used to conclude than any real phenomenon, including a supernova, is harmless.

Harmless supernova fallacies are a class of arguments, usually a subspecies of false dichotomy or continuum fallacy, which can equally be used to argue that almost any physically real phenomenon--including a supernova--is harmless / manageable / safe / unimportant.


Keji Li

What's the significance of this fallacy, as in why is it a valid fallacy instead of a new variant of a straw man? I understand that quoting prominent discussions would offend some ppl (the ones making this fallacy) but that is one of the best ways to support the significance of this fallacy. As is this sounds like a simple aggregate of a few fallacies not worthy of a new name.