Difference between revisions of "False dichotomy"
From Conservapedia
(filling in a red link created by ed poor earlier) |
Feebasfactor (Talk | contribs) (current examples can be kept, but please add examples of liberal false dichotomies as well) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | A '''false dichotomy''', or "false choice," is a logical fallacy whereby one side of an argument presents to the other two unpleasant, opposite, and extreme alternatives, alleging that they are the only choices open in the matter up for debate. The fallacy lies in disregarding the middle ground, or failing to credit the range of disagreement on the issue. Some examples follow. | + | A '''false dichotomy''', or "false choice," is a [[logical fallacy]] whereby one side of an argument presents to the other two unpleasant, opposite, and extreme alternatives, alleging that they are the only choices open in the matter up for debate. The fallacy lies in disregarding the middle ground, or failing to credit the range of disagreement on the issue. Some examples follow. |
==Examples of a false dichotomy== | ==Examples of a false dichotomy== | ||
| − | *'''''America - love it or leave it!''''' This is a false dichotomy because the third choice - be a [[patriot]] by seeking favorable change - is open but disregarded. Unflinching support, after all, has never been a characteristic of American patriotism. | + | *'''''America - love it or leave it!''''' This is a false dichotomy because the third choice - be a [[patriot]] by seeking favorable change - is open but disregarded. Unflinching support, after all, has never been a characteristic of [[American]] patriotism. |
| − | *'''''If science fails to explain something, the only alternative must be divine intervention''''' This false dichotomy fails to grasp the nature of science - that knowledge expands, and that some natural causes may not yet be descried. The third option - continued research - is open but ignored. | + | *'''''If science fails to explain something, the only alternative must be divine intervention''''' This false dichotomy fails to grasp the nature of [[science]] - that knowledge expands, and that some [[natural causes]] may not yet be descried. The third option - continued [[research]] - is open but ignored. |
[[category:Rhetoric]] | [[category:Rhetoric]] | ||
Revision as of 03:05, March 13, 2008
A false dichotomy, or "false choice," is a logical fallacy whereby one side of an argument presents to the other two unpleasant, opposite, and extreme alternatives, alleging that they are the only choices open in the matter up for debate. The fallacy lies in disregarding the middle ground, or failing to credit the range of disagreement on the issue. Some examples follow.
Examples of a false dichotomy
- America - love it or leave it! This is a false dichotomy because the third choice - be a patriot by seeking favorable change - is open but disregarded. Unflinching support, after all, has never been a characteristic of American patriotism.
- If science fails to explain something, the only alternative must be divine intervention This false dichotomy fails to grasp the nature of science - that knowledge expands, and that some natural causes may not yet be descried. The third option - continued research - is open but ignored.
