What Fallacies type is this? In one of her columns, Abigail Van Buren printed the letter of "I'd rather be a window." The letter writer, a divorcee, complained about widows who aid they had a hard time coping. Far better, she wrote,to be a window than to be a divorcee,who are all "rejects" who have been "publicly dumped" and are avoided "like they have leprosy." Abby recognized the pseudoreasoning for what it was, though she did not call it by our name. What is our name for it?
I assume you mean "widow" not "window."
Check this site to see which fallacy fits your example. I think it could be # 11, 17, 18, 22, 28, or 35. Perhaps you'll find another one.
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/
In most cases, there are a series of steps or gradations between one event and the one in question and no reason is given as to why the intervening steps or gradations will simply be bypassed." If this happens then this is going to happen, then this, then this.........No one can tell the future.
The fallacy being described in the given scenario is known as the "No True Scotsman" fallacy. This fallacy occurs when someone attempts to protect a generalization or belief from counterexamples by redefining the criteria or adding ad hoc exceptions to exclude the counterexample.
To understand why this fallacy is being applied in this scenario, we need to analyze the context. The letter writer is expressing discontent with widows who claim to have difficulties in life, suggesting that being a divorcee is worse. They make generalizations about divorcees, labeling them as "rejects" who have been "publicly dumped" and are avoided "like they have leprosy."
Abby, the columnist, recognizes the flawed reasoning beneath the letter writer's arguments, but she doesn't explicitly call it the "No True Scotsman" fallacy. The "No True Scotsman" fallacy typically involves a situation where someone tries to exclude counterexamples by adding characteristics or criteria that were not originally specified.