Hyperbole

The Gartner Hype Cycle: best ever

Cogito ergo sum
Logic and rhetoric

Key articles

* Logical fallacy
* Syllogism
* Argument

General logic

* Relevance logic
* Selection bias
* Balance fallacy
* Word magic
* Imprecision fallacy
* Falacia de atribución

Bad logic

* One single proof
* God of the gaps
* Appeal to celebrity
* Existential assumption
* Appeal to common sense
* پاسخ کورتیر

v \- t \- e

“”You are going to approve one of the biggest tax cuts in history. You are going to approve one of the biggest tax increases in history. You are going to drive business out. Your regulations are a disaster, and you're going to increase regulations all over the place. And by the way, my tax cut is the biggest since Ronald Reagan.

—Donald Trump, 2016 presidential debate[1]

Hyperbole (or hype) is the use of exaggeration to make a point. It is completely and utterly unlike any other rhetorical technique, the single most powerful way to communicate any concept ever conceived.

Hyperbole is inevitably found in advertising and press releases by companies as well as universities. The field of artificial intelligence itself has a culture of hype.[2]:235-239,251-255

## Contents

* 1 Fallacy
* 2 Gartner Hype Cycle
* 3 Criti-hype
* 4 See also
* 5 External links
* 6 Notes
* 7 References

## Fallacy[edit]

Hyperbolic fallacy (also known as "'inductive hyperbole") occurs when something is stated much more strongly than the observations behind it support.

Hyperbolic fallacy is common in science reporting. Science reporters try to make science interesting to the general public, and all too often do this by exaggerating the importance of certain findings, "hyping" them as "breakthroughs" that "entirely upset" our previous assumptions, etc.

In fact, it is in the nature of inductive sampling that no conclusion is guaranteed to be true. There is always a degree of uncertainty, and always a possibility that the entire study might prove wanting.

This constant emphasis on breakthroughs in science may prime some listeners to accepting more wild claims of pseudoscience -- because if science can do it, why can't the nice man with a website find a cancer cure?

The "truthful hyperbole", which is an oxymoron, according to Trump (or his pseudo-autobiographer[note 1]) never hurts (in real estate).[4] People who know Trump seem to think he doesn't understand the difference between the truth and a lie.[5]

## Gartner Hype Cycle[edit]

Even the Gartner Hype Cycle (not an actual cycle), which while looking plausible and purportedly described the phases of hyperbole qualitatively for new technology, was a load of hype that was put forward by Gartner business consultants in 2003.[6] The Economist analyzed new technologies to see whether they fit the model described by Gartner. They found that new technologies rarely fit the model, concluding:[7]

“”We find, in short, that the cycle is a rarity. Tracing breakthrough technologies over time, only a small share—perhaps a fifth—move from innovation to excitement to despondency to widespread adoption. Lots of tech becomes widely used without such a rollercoaster ride. Others go from boom to bust, but do not come back. We estimate that of all the forms of tech which fall into the trough of disillusionment, six in ten do not rise again. Our conclusions are similar to those of Mr [Michael] Mullany: “An alarming number of technology trends are flashes in the pan.”

## Criti-hype[edit]

Lee Vinsel, a professor of Science, Technology and Society, coined the term criti-hype to refer to a form of self-criticism that is simultaneously hyperbolically promotional, giving warnings about distant and implausible dangers that make a technology seem more powerful than it is to act as a distraction from more immediate and likely dangers. He gives as examples:[8]

* The Human Genome Project and CRISPR's corporate successors warnings designer babies and ageless bodies. The genomics company 23andMe has long faced informed consent and privacy concerns over personal DNA data,[8] particularly in 2024 when the company has faced the possibility of bankruptcy.[9]
* Claims were made by researchers that nanotechnology will transform nearly all fields… so more funding needs to be given to the researchers to plan for the coming transformations… which have yet to eventuate.[8]
* Artificial intelligence has been described as a rebranding exercise by industry.[8] More recently, "artificial general intelligence" (or "strong AI"), and Roko's Basilisk have been promoted as futuristic/implausible dangers of AI to distract people from the many immediate harms of ChatGPT.[2]:178,253-254[10]

## See also[edit]

* Bullshit
* Fake precision
* And the super-duper winner is… Donald Trump

## External links[edit]

* See the Wikipedia article on Hyperbole.
* Inductive Hyperbole, Bruce Thompson

## Notes[edit]

1. ↑ Tony Schwartz[3]

## References[edit]

1. ↑ The first Trump-Clinton presidential debate transcript, annotated by Aaron Blake (September 26, 2016 at 11:59 p.m. EDT) The Washington Post.
2. ↑ 2.0 2.1 AI Snake Oil: What Artificial Intelligence Can Do, What It Can't, and How to Tell the Difference by Arvind Narayanan & Sayash Kapoor (2024) Princeton University Press. ISBN 069124913X.
3. ↑ Donald Trump's Ghostwriter Tells All: The Art of the Deal made America see Trump as a charmer with an unfailing knack for business. Tony Schwartz helped create that myth—and regrets it by Jane Mayer (July 25, 2016) The New Yorker.
4. ↑ "I Call It Truthful Hyperbole": The Most Popular Quotes From Trump's "The Art of the Deal". The most-highlighted excerpts from Trump's book take on new meaning, given the way he ran his campaign—and is running America. by Emily Price (04.04.17) Fast Company.
5. ↑ Chris Christie betrays Trump defenders’ remarkably dim view of the president’s intellect by Aaron Blake (April 2, 2018) The Washington Post.
6. ↑ Understanding Gartner's Hype Cycles (30 May 2003) Gartner (archived from February 1, 2021).
7. ↑ Artificial intelligence is losing hype: For some, that is proof the tech will in time succeed. Are they right? (Aug 19th 2024) The Economist (archived from 19 Aug 2024 18:16:28 UTC).
8. ↑ 8.0 8.1 8.2 8.3 You’re Doing It Wrong: Notes on Criticism and Technology Hype by Lee Vinsel (Feb 1, 2021) Medium.
9. ↑ Legal expert on how 23andMe’s financial struggles could impact customer data (November 19, 2024, 3:04 AM) ABC News.
10. ↑ The AI Doomers’ Playbook by Nirit Weiss-Blatt (Apr 14th 2023 12:10pm) Techdirt.

v \- t \- e

Articles about logical fallacies

Informal fallacies: |  Appeal to tradition • Appeal to novelty • Appeal to nature • Argument from morality • Argumentum ad martyrdom • Big words • Certum est quia impossibile est • Morton's fork • Friend argument • Exception that proves the rule • Extended analogy • Hindsight bias • Race card • Moralistic fallacy • Release the data • Gish Gallop • Terrorism-baiting • Uncertainty tactic • Greece-baiting • Ham Hightail • Red-baiting • Gore's Law • Nazi analogies • Mistaking the map for the territory • Red herring • Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur • Presentism • Sunk cost • Two wrongs make a right • Flying carpet fallacy • My enemy's enemy • Appeal to ancient wisdom • Danth's Law • Argumentum ad lunam • Balance fallacy • Golden hammer • Loaded question • Escape to the future • Word magic • Spider-Man fallacy • Sanctioning the devil • Appeal to mystery • Informal fallacy • Common sense • Post-designation • Relativist fallacy • Due diligence • Straw man • Good old days • Appeal to probability • Infinite regress • Circular reasoning • Media was wrong before • Is–ought problem • Ad iram • Just asking questions • Pink-baiting • Appeal to faith • Appeal to fear • Appeal to bias • Appeal to confidence • Appeal to consequences • Appeal to emotion • Appeal to flattery • Appeal to gravity • Appeal to hate • Argument from omniscience • Argument from silence • Argumentum ad baculum • Argumentum ad fastidium • Association fallacy • Broken window fallacy • Category mistake • Confounding factor • Counterfactual fallacy • Courtier's Reply • Damning with faint praise • Definitional fallacies • Equivocation • Fallacy of accent • Fallacy of accident • Fallacy of amphiboly • Gambler's fallacy • Imprecision fallacy • Moving the goalposts • Nirvana fallacy • Overprecision • Pathos gambit • Pragmatic fallacy • Quote mining • Argumentum ad sarcina inserta • Science doesn't know everything • Slothful induction • Spotlight fallacy • Style over substance • Toupee fallacy • Genuine but insignificant cause • Argument from incredulity • Appeal to age • Argumentum ad nauseam • Phantom distinction • Appeal to common sense • Argumentum ad hysteria • Omnipotence paradox • Argument from etymology • Appeal to trauma • Countless counterfeits fallacy •
| Ad hoc: |  No True Scotsman • Moving the goalposts • Escape hatch • Handwave • Special pleading • Slothful induction • Nirvana fallacy • God of the gaps • PIDOOMA • Ad hoc • Tone argument •
| Arguments from ignorance: |  Science doesn't know everything • Argument from incredulity • Argument from silence • Toupee fallacy • Appeal to censorship • Science was wrong before • Holmesian fallacy • Argument from omniscience • Willful ignorance • Argument from ignorance •
| Causation fallacies: |  Post hoc, ergo propter hoc • Correlation does not imply causation • Wrong direction • Counterfactual fallacy • Regression fallacy • Gambler's fallacy • Denying the antecedent • Genuine but insignificant cause •
| Circular reasoning: |  Infinite regress • Argument by assertion • Argumentum ad dictionarium • Appeal to faith • Circular reasoning • Self-refuting idea •
| Emotional appeals: |  Appeal to fear • Appeal to emotion • Appeal to confidence • Deepity • Argumentum ad baculum • Appeal to shame • Appeal to flattery • Tone argument • Appeal to money • Argumentum ad fastidium • Appeal to gravity • Appeal to consequences • Loaded language • Style over substance • Appeal to pity • Appeal to hate • Pathos gambit • Shaming • Degenerate • Abomination •
| Fallacies of ambiguity: |  Fallacy of accent • Equivocation • Fallacy of amphiboly • Quote mining • Fallacy of ambiguity • Moral equivalence • Scope fallacy • Suppressed correlative • Not as bad as • Etymology • Continuum fallacy • Wronger than wrong • Definitional fallacies • Code word • Phantom distinction •
Formal fallacies: |  Confusion of the inverse • Denying the antecedent • Non sequitur • Affirmative conclusion from a negative premise • Not even wrong • Chewbacca Defense • Affirming a disjunct • Illicit process • Four-term fallacy • Negative conclusion from affirmative premises • Fallacy fallacy • Substituting explanation for premise • Enthymeme • Syllogism • Formal fallacy • Existential assumption • Masked man fallacy • Self-refuting idea • Argument by gibberish • One single proof • Affirming the consequent • False dilemma • Conjunction fallacy •
Fallacious arguments: |  Bumblebee argument • Fatwa envy • Gotcha argument • Hoyle's fallacy • Intuition pump • Logic and Creation • Not Circular Reasoning • Peanut butter argument • Great Beethoven fallacy • Fallacy of unique founding conditions • Evil is the absence of God • Argument from first cause • How do you know? Were you there? • Argument from design • Argument from beauty • Appeal to nature • Solferino fallacy • Religious scientists • Nothing to hide • Argument from fine tuning • Creep shaming • "I used to be an atheist" • Atheism as a religion • Argumentum ad populum • Argument from morality • Anti-environmentalism • Appeal to bias • Apophasis • Argumentum ad nauseam • Appeal to censorship • Argumentum ad sarcina inserta • Blaming the victim • Bait-and-switch • Danth's Law • Chewbacca Defense • Canard • DARVO • Demonization • Escape hatch • Friend argument • Everyone is racist • Gish Gallop • Greece-baiting • Gore's Law • Ham Hightail • Just asking questions • Leading question • Loaded language • Linking to authority • Loaded question • Lying by omission • Motte and bailey • Nazi analogies • Moving the goalposts • One single proof • Pink-baiting • One-way hash argument • Pathos gambit • Quote mining • Poisoning the well • Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur • Race card • Red-baiting • Red herring • Release the data • Science was wrong before • Shill gambit • Straw man • Silent Majority • Uncertainty tactic • Style over substance • Terrorism-baiting • Weasel word • What's the harm (logical fallacy) • Whataboutism • Bullshit • Logical fallacy • Banana argument • Scapegoat • How come there are still monkeys? • Anti-racist is a code word for anti-white • Ontological argument • Omnipotence paradox • Presuppositionalism • Just a joke • Countless counterfeits fallacy •
Conditional fallacies: |  Slippery slope • What's the harm (logical fallacy) • Special pleading • Conditional fallacy • On the spot fallacy • Appeal to the minority • Argumentum ad populum • Galileo gambit • Professor of nothing •
| Genetic fallacies: |  Genetic fallacy •
|  | Appeals to authority: |  Ipse dixit • Appeal to confidence • Argumentum ad populum • Argument from authority • Linking to authority • Silent Majority • Invincible authority • Appeal to celebrity • Ultracrepidarianism • Appeal to the minority • Galileo gambit • Appeal to identity • Weasel word • Professor of nothing • Euthyphro dilemma • Divine command theory •
|  | Ad hominem: |  Ad iram • Argumentum ad cellarium • Bulverism • Poisoning the well • Blaming the victim • Tu quoque • Whataboutism • Nutpicking • Jonanism • Demonization • Shill gambit • Appeal to bias • Fallacy of opposition • Association fallacy • Damning with faint praise • Pathos gambit • Appeal to identity • Argumentum ad hominem • Nazi analogies • Not an argument • Nothing to hide • Scapegoat • 地下室论证 •
| Imprecision fallacies: |  Apex fallacy • Overprecision • Cherry picking • Overgeneralization • Texas sharpshooter fallacy • False analogy • Appeal to fiction • Spotlight fallacy • Pragmatic fallacy • Selection bias • Anecdotal evidence • Category mistake • Nutpicking • Imprecision fallacy • Confounding factor • Fallacy of accident • Neyman's bias •
Valid logical methods: |  Rapoport's Rules • Negative evidence • Reductio ad absurdum •
Fallacy collections: |  SeekFind • Nizkor Project • Fallacy Files • Your Logical Fallacy Is • Logically Fallacious •