False dilemma
A false dilemma (also called false dichotomy, the either-or fallacy, fallacy of false choice, black-and-white thinking or the fallacy of exhaustive hypotheses) is a type of logical fallacy that involves a situation in which only two alternatives are considered, when in fact there are additional options.
False dilemma can arise intentionally, when fallacy is used in an attempt to force a choice ("If you are not with us, you are against us.") But the fallacy can also arise simply by accidental omission of additional options rather than by deliberate deception (e.g., "I thought we were friends, but all my friends were at my apartment last night and you weren't there.")
In the community of philosophers and scholars, many believe that "unless a distinction can be made rigorous and precise it isn't really a distinction." An exception is analytic philosopher John Searle, who called it an incorrect assumption which arises false dichotomies. Searle insists that "it is a condition of the adequacy of a precise theory of an indeterminate phenomenon that it should precisely characterize that phenomenon as indeterminate; and a distinction is no less a distinction for allowing for a family of related, marginal, diverging cases." Similarly, when two alternatives are presented, they are often, though not always, two extreme points on some spectrum of possibilities; this can lend credence to the larger argument by giving the impression that the options are mutually exclusive, even though they need not be. Furthermore, the options in false dichotomies are typically presented as being collectively exhaustive, in which case the fallacy can be overcome, or at least weakened, by considering other possibilities, or perhaps by considering a whole spectrum of possibilities, as in fuzzy logic.
Examples
Morton's Fork
Morton's Fork, a choice between two equally unpleasant options, is often a false dilemma. The phrase originates from an argument for taxing English nobles:
- Either the nobles of this country appear wealthy, in which case they can be taxed for good; or they appear poor, in which case they are living frugally and must have immense savings, which can be taxed for good.
This is a false dilemma and a catch-22, because it fails to allow for the possibility that some members of the nobility may in fact lack liquid assets as well as the probability that those who appear poor also lack liquid assets.
False choice
The presentation of a false choice often reflects a deliberate attempt to eliminate the middle ground on an issue. Eldridge Cleaver used such a quotation during his 1968 presidential campaign: "You're either part of the solution or part of the problem." An example would be the former president Bush stating that the world had a choice to make; "Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists.". A common argument against noise pollution laws involves a false choice. It might be argued that in New York City noise should not be regulated, because if it were, the city would drastically change in a negative way. This argument involves assuming that, for example, a bar must be shut down for it to not cause disturbing levels of noise after midnight. This ignores the fact that the bar could simply lower its noise levels, and/or install more soundproof structural elements to keep the noise from excessively transmitting onto others' properties.
Black-and-white thinking
A common form of the false dilemma is black-and-white thinking. Many people routinely engage in black-and-white thinking, an example of which is feeling boundless optimism when things are going well and suddenly switching to total despair at the first setback. Another example is someone who labels other people as all good or all bad.
Falsum in uno, falsum in omnibus
The Latin phrase falsum in uno, falsum in omnibus which, roughly translated, means "false in one thing, false in everything" has been used to label someone found to be wrong on one issue to also be wrong with regard to other issues. Arising in Roman courts, this principle meant that if a witness was proved false in some parts of his testimony, any further statements were also regarded as false unless they were independently corroborated. Falsus is thus a fallacy of logic. The description that an initial false statement is a prelude to the making of more false statements is itself false. Such a description is not supported by either experience or fact. This is an example of an ad hominem argument and a special case of the associatory fallacy.
It must be noted that falsum in uno, falsum in omnibus status as a logical fallacy is independent of whether it is wise or unwise to use as a legal rule, with witnesses testifying in courts being held for perjury if part of their statements are invalid.
False opposites
This dichotomy occurs when two extremes or opposites are presented in an argument, when in reality only one of those choices presented is, in actuality, physically possible. This usually occurs when a physically possible opposite gains an opposite through the human desire to constantly have a balance (through the creation of false opposites).
See also
References
External links
- The Black-or-White Fallacy entry in The Fallacy Files
- Article in Slate Magazine, showing how President Barack Obama uses the false dilemma fallacy
Retrieved from : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma
