This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Philosophy: Logic Low‑importance This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles Low This redirect has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Associated task forces: /  Logic

Isn't this related to the slippery slope fallacy? -- Galaxiaad 15:45, 1 July 2006 (UTC) reply

Hats off to "chris Q" who wrote this content. hilarious and also illustrates the definition well. -- Estephan500 18:48, 4 August 2006 (UTC) reply

oh god the examples are freaking hilarious lol

Thank you so much Chris Q... seriously, this article gave me the best laughs I've had in a while. I think this article is pretty good stuff at the very least. -- Impact Red 12.20.07 —Preceding comment was added at 08:23, 20 December 2007 (UTC) reply

Agreed. Still it is a very good article, which defies the false dilemma that humor and good quality are mutually exclusive. Said: Rursus ( ☻) 06:49, 24 September 2008 (UTC) reply

As funny as this is, should the 'paragliding' quip at the end be included? It doesn't seem like it would be necessary to making a 'misleading vividness' mistake and could mislead others as to what is required for 'misleading vividness.' Chessofnerd ( talk) 07:39, 17 June 2012 (UTC) reply