I’ve seen the entity called the Invisible Pink Unicorn bandied about here (SDMB and especially GD). And I think perhaps it is used a little too liberally. Hence I have devised my own modest proposal for the proper classification of unicorns.
The Common Unicorn -
This unicorn can be seen prancing around in many areas. Sometimes when you least expect it. Results from incomplete or invalid evidence. Candidates include UFO’s, Bigfoot, ghosts and the like but also may include your favorite “common sense” notions.
The Invisible Unicorn -
Something known only by faith. This obviously includes certain religious deities, and some other romantic notions some may find surprising: love, the existence of the ego, and the soul.
The Invisible Pink Unicorn -
Not only is it known by faith but it’s properties appear contradictory to the un-initiated (she is both invisible *and[\i] pink after all). This happens with certain religions, especially wherein beliefs have been amalgamated retroactively. This is a double whammy because it does not require proof and it is logically inconsistent with itself. Use it wisely.
Any reactions/critiques and counter proposals welcome.