False Dichotomy: Difference between revisions
Content added Content deleted
Looney Toons (talk | contribs) (layout tweaks, changed header level of "looks like but isn't") |
m (clean up) |
||
Line 105: | Line 105: | ||
** It ceases to be a paradox when you consider that the opposite ("not all Cretans are liars") does allow for some Cretans to lie, including Epimenides. |
** It ceases to be a paradox when you consider that the opposite ("not all Cretans are liars") does allow for some Cretans to lie, including Epimenides. |
||
*** Unfortunately, this is not true; considering the opposite of a statement does not cause the original to become logically consistent. |
*** Unfortunately, this is not true; considering the opposite of a statement does not cause the original to become logically consistent. |
||
*** That's just a second |
*** That's just a second False Dichotomy. The ''statement'' doesn't need to be logically consistent, since the ''situation'' is: namely, Epimenides is a liar. As such, we can reject what he says, and as such, there is no reason to reconcile his being a liar with him saying "all Cretans always lie". |
||
* Even if Evolution could be disproven, Creationism would not automatically take its place. |
* Even if Evolution could be disproven, Creationism would not automatically take its place. |
||
** However, Creationism IS incompatible with Evolution. The true false dichotomy comes from claiming Christianity and Creationism are the same thing and therefore Christianity and Evolution are incompatible. A large majority of Christians, even in the US, think that YE Creationism is utter nonsense. The dispute isn't helped by outspoken Atheists claiming Evolution disproves religion. |
** However, Creationism IS incompatible with Evolution. The true false dichotomy comes from claiming Christianity and Creationism are the same thing and therefore Christianity and Evolution are incompatible. A large majority of Christians, even in the US, think that YE Creationism is utter nonsense. The dispute isn't helped by outspoken Atheists claiming Evolution disproves religion. |
||
Line 119: | Line 119: | ||
== Looks like this fallacy but is not |
== Looks like this fallacy but is not == |
||
* When two choices encompass all possibilities. |
* When two choices encompass all possibilities. |
||
* Normally "[[With Us or Against Us]]" is a false dichotomy but a head of state can declare that all those not declaring themselves to be allies are to be considered enemies. Since such a declaration is performative<ref>''i.e.'', if I declare you my enemy, you are my enemy</ref> it cannot be fallacious, and thus is not itself a false dichotomy, even if the reasoning that leads someone to say that is. It's not very smart under most circumstances, however. |
* Normally "[[With Us or Against Us]]" is a false dichotomy but a head of state can declare that all those not declaring themselves to be allies are to be considered enemies. Since such a declaration is performative<ref>''i.e.'', if I declare you my enemy, you are my enemy</ref> it cannot be fallacious, and thus is not itself a false dichotomy, even if the reasoning that leads someone to say that is. It's not very smart under most circumstances, however. |