Bo Bennet calls the golden hammer a pseudo-logical fallacy and describes it thus:
Proposing the same type of solution to different types of problems. This is more of an error in creativity or knowledge than reasoning.
RationalWiki views it as a logical fallacy and claims it
occurs when you propose the same, simple solution (or type of solution) to every problem.
Although I can see Bennett's perspective. It does seem more like an error in creativity or knowledge, but the way I see it being used seems deceptive. For example, we have computers, why should anything think that all of reality can be explained as a computer simulation? Or, in a political context, assuming we have funds, does that mean spending money is the appropriate solution to a political problem?
What I am looking for are references that will help me clarify what the golden hammer means in an argument. Is it a fallacy or not? Perhaps it is part of a larger form of reasoning that may or may not be fallacious. Hence the question:
Is the golden hammer fallacy a real fallacy?
Bennett, B. "Pseudo-Logical Fallacies" Retrieved on April 28, 2019 from Logically Fallacious at https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/6/Pseudo-Logical-Fallacies
"Golden hammer" Retrieved on April 28, 2019 from RationalWiki at https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Golden_hammer