A Logical Fallacy or a Literary Device

Thanks for the answer. No argument, no fallacies. That's what I was thinking, too. I understand that nobody will say that Leonard Cohen is committing a logical fallacy when they hear his song. (Oops, is 'nobody will say' another example of alleged certainty?) Just wanted to be sure.

I wouldn't say there's a fallacy on your part ;)

Thanks for your comment. That was all clear. Strangely though, the difference between a factual claim and a literary device has led me to see where my initial doubt came from. Of course, I knew Cohen was not making factual claims. Of course, I'm not suspecting that Cohen is committing the fallacy of alleged certainty just because his lines start with 'Everybody knows.' However, what about the case of the writers or artists with more stronger political persuasion (Pete Seeger comes to mind though I'm not sure if he's the best example)? Doesn't the line between a literary device and a politically-charged argument sometimes blur? It may be said that a lot of what those writers/singers express are literary devices as they are artists, but what if they are used to make a point and persuade people into action? Of course, we could take this further and ask, "Is there such a thing as pure art? Isn't art always 'political' in some way? Isn't an art a 'statement' about how the world is and should be?" Can we even categorize Cohen and Seeger differently? For one thing, I know Cohen was as 'political' as anybody in his own way. This reminds me of the 'paradox of the heap.' So, I guess I'm still wandering in the land of fallacies.

It is true that it can be blurred. In regards to Pete Seeger and Leonard Cohen, both were politically active and their art often reflected their political beliefs. While some may categorize their art as pure entertainment, others may see it as a form of political activism.  Ultimately, it will depend on one's perspective and interpretation.