The fallacy of a suppressed correlative occurs when an arguer broadens the application of one side of disjunctive statement to include the other side within its scope, thus collapsing the disjunction into a sweeping assertion.

An example is:

Bill: "Mother Teresa was no ordinary person. She was extraordinary."

Jill: "But everyone is an extraordinary person, even ordinary people. So, she wasn't especially special after all."

Jill is targeting the disjunctive statement that each person is either "ordinary or extraordinary" and is redefining "extraordinary" to include "ordinary." This makes the distinction between the two collapse.

Note that the word "extraordinary" literally means "beyond the ordinary." This means Jill's position is tantamount to saying extraordinary people actually do not exist, since they are the same as ordinary people. Trying to assert this merely by stipulating a broadened scope of "extraordinary" is the fallacy of suppressed correlative.

Image Credit: Kkodai on DeviantArt under CC BY-SA 3.0