Talk:False dilemma
|
- The false dilemma is also common in politics, especially in places like the United States where there are only two major political parties.
The article shows no evidence that the US has more "false dilemma" fallacies in its politics than elsewhere. Europe has its share, and non-democratic countries have more than their share.
Let's keep out the "especially in...US" thing pending evidence for it. --Ed Poor
- Well, voting systems that encourage two-party systems do so by squee\ing out minority parties. Voters avoid voting for minority parties in the belief that they would be wasting their vote, and instead vote for the best of two evils. I guess you could see this as the fallacy of the excluded middle, but I'm not convinced... Martin
- Actually, with the disctrict voting system, you are wasting your vote if you vote for a small party. With proportional representation, on the other hand, you don't. -- Mrdice
- Right, the voting system is arguably flawed, but where's the fallacy? A fallacious conclusion drawn from the voting system might be "You're either a Democrat or a Republican". (Or: either a liberal or a conservative) Aragorn2 16:17, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)
The original definition and the discussion here is quite interesting but has one major flaw: your use of the word "dilemma". A dilemma is not a situation in which one has to decide between a more or less positive and a more or less negative alternative, but rather a situation in which both alternatives are more or less negative!
- 'False dilemma' is a single term, and its meaning need not have to do with that of 'dilemma'. Just as one can commit the fallacy of special pleading without actually pleading. Andre Engels 13:37, 3 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Example is confusing
It is confusing to include "You're either with us, or you're with the terrorists" as an illustrative example of a false dilemma. When taken in context, this statement is usually made as part of a statement of policy rather than current fact. In this context, it is a condition that the speaker will assume to be true and act accordingly (i.e., if an entity does not show itself to be with "us", it will be assumed to be with the "terrorists"). Unless it is impossible for the speaker to make this assumption and (rightfully or wrongfully) act on this assumption, this is not a good example of a false dilemma.
- The speaker's assumption is in itself fallacious, because it implies a false dilemma. If I'd assume that you're either a Bolivian or a Nigerian, that would be equally fallacious. You can't be both, obviously, but you could be neither. Do you mean to say "Just because somebody makes illogical assumptions, that doesn't mean they're fallacious."??? Aragorn2 16:12, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)
"The Opposite" Episode of Seinfeld
Would this episode, where George assumes that "if every instinct he has is wrong, then the oppoiste must be right" be an example of this fallacy?
- I think that's a Non sequitur --69.211.104.41 15:06, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
"Dilemma" not correct word
Out of the list of terms covering the same issue, I think that false dilemma is the least practical because a dilemma implies, contrary to popular use, a choice between two unpleasant alternatives. That doesn't necessarily apply to the issue discussed in this article, so I think that "false dichotomy" or one of the other terms should be the primary title.