Not every use of a definition is necessarily fallacious. If the definition is properly justified and is selected in a properly justified way, it is generally not fallacious. However, it is fallacious when at least one of the following conditions are true:
MORE IDEAS FROM THE ARTICLE
The argument from a dictionary is a logical fallacy and happens when someone's argument is based, in a problematic way, on the definition of a particular term as it appears in a dictionary. The problem with these arguments:
"We should ignore the theory of evolution because the dictionary says that a theory is just an opinion that you have about something you can't prove."
The person using this fallacy is basing their statement on a specific definition of the word "theory" while ignoring alternative definitions that will better capture the meaning of the term as it's used in a scientific context.
When responding to appeals to definition, it is useful to know the terms denotation, which is the literal meaning of a word, and connotation, which is a feeling the word evokes beyond its denotation.
The structure and use of dictionaries have changed as new technologies developed.
The meaning of chutzpah differs depending on context and degree. In the right circumstances, chutzpah may suggest spirit. In the wrong situation, chutzpah indicates insolence.
A positive aspect of chutzpah revolves around being confident, daring, and brazen. The negative viewpoint of chutzpah revolves around violating norms and overstepping boundaries. But chutzpah can be positive or negative depending on a person's perspective.
Usually, ‘virtue signaling’ has a negative meaning (even if there are a few situations where it is likely to lead to meaningful positive outcomes).
This behavior is generally defined as being mainly driven by the desire to signal your good moral values, regardless of whether it leads to a meaningful outcome or not.