Actually, it strikes me that this particular example shouldn’t be classified as GFE. “Errors pile up and accomplishments disappear” is a consequence of the way that the game logic works: in a sense, you could say that it’s a theorem implied by the axioms of the game. While it’s valid to say that Tetris is a flawed piece of proceduralrhetoric in that its axioms do not correctly describe the real world, if you called it fictional evidence you would also be forced to call math fictional evidence, which probably isn’t what you’d want.
LF:GFE
I’m afraid I don’t know what that stands for.
Logical Fallacy: Generalization from Fictional Evidence
Actually, it strikes me that this particular example shouldn’t be classified as GFE. “Errors pile up and accomplishments disappear” is a consequence of the way that the game logic works: in a sense, you could say that it’s a theorem implied by the axioms of the game. While it’s valid to say that Tetris is a flawed piece of procedural rhetoric in that its axioms do not correctly describe the real world, if you called it fictional evidence you would also be forced to call math fictional evidence, which probably isn’t what you’d want.
What?
Eh?
Ah, thank you.