vault backup: 2026-03-23 17:15:27

ambiguity.md

@@ -57,38 +57,3 @@ Assuming a whole has a property because its parts have that property
 [Division](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_division "Fallacy of division")
 
 Assuming parts have a property because the whole has that property
-
-### Category Mistake
-
-> [!quote] [Category mistake](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category_mistake)
-> An example is a person learning that the game of cricket involves team spirit,
-> and after being given a demonstration of each player's role,
-> asking which player performs the "team spirit".
-
-All squares are rectangles, but not all rectangles are squares.
-
-#### Overgeneralization via Hyperspecification
-
-Or "inappropriate synecdoche[^1]"
-
-[^1]: **synecdoche:** Using the name of a part to refer to the whole, or vice versa.
-
-Much of my issue with terminology
-can be blamed on **overgeneralization via hyperspecification**,
-
-[Proprietary eponyms](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/proprietary_eponym)
-(synonym: [genericized trademark](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/genericized_trademark))
-are usually[^2] an example of such,
-and are prominent in electrical construction.[^3]
-
-[^2]: I'm not a complete pedant, Cadweld is a perfectly unambiguous substitution.
-    "Caddy", "Hilti", and "Vitalink" are my real complaints,
-    where the word only gets me marginally closer
-    to creating a concrete image in my head.
-
-    The general acceptance of "band-aid"
-    compared to the rejection of "coke"
-    may be related.
-
-[^3]: See [Database of American Proprietary Eponyms](https://www.searstower.org/rkrause/brands.html)
-    for examples.