• Tkpa007
    2
    Hello All,
    Oftentimes, in a scenario involving the usage of the fallacy of false dichotomy, all it takes is a third option to disprove the false logic. However, is it not true that in the case an interlocutor is trying to go further and actually disprove the validity of the option his opponent was trying to prove in the first place, the mere presenting of a valid, third option does absolutely nothing in that regard? In other words, am I wholly correct in saying that when someone uses the fallacy of a false dichotomy, the presenting of a valid, third or more option just indicates that you can have more than one valid option but does nothing to negate the validity of the option the individual wanted you to initially be persuaded to believe in? I say this because the individual could readily just affirm the third option you presented while still holding on to his own initial, first option; provided they are mutually exclusive; which oftentimes can be depending on the topic of contention at hand.
    Rather, the actual validity of that would have to be disproved on its own merits and not by just presenting more options than what the individual limited it to in its false dichotomy setup. I would love to hear your views on this oft-used dialectic.
    Thanks in advance guys!
  • SophistiCat
    2.2k
    Well, if someone says something to the effect of (A or B), and it is not the case that (A or B), then a logical fallacy has been committed. How damaging that is to their overall argument depends on the context. Sometimes, as you say, not very damaging, and the argument can be repaired without much difficulty.
  • TheMadFool
    13.8k
    The false dichotomy roots itself in either the deliberate concealment, or unwitting oversight, of a third alternative and presents the audience with what then becomes the false, two-options only, dichotomy with the intention of making you choose one of them; more often than not, both options are undesirable.
  • unenlightened
    8.7k
    Either a dichotomy is false, or it is true.

    Is a false dichotomy. Dichotomies are useful or useless, applicable or inapplicable to particular cases.

    But strictly speaking, a dichotomy is a distinction, and the statement above is false because the perfectly reasonable dichotomy of true and false applies to statements, not to distinctions.
  • Tkpa007
    2

    Could you elaborate with an example of what you mean?
  • xyzmix
    40
    Perhaps true and false things are different, and being false isn't as weak as thought.

    Coming off wrongly, cars, etc.
  • unenlightened
    8.7k
    Could you elaborate with an example of what you mean?Tkpa007

    Another example.

    Dichotomy: smart v dumb.

    Statement: 'Either Trump is smart or he is dumb.'

    There are various ways the statement can turn out to be be false
    1. Trump might be on the cusp, a borderline case between smart and dumb.
    2. Trump might be smart about some things,and dumb about others.
    3. Trump might be the noise an elephant makes, to which neither smartness nor dumbness can apply.

    None of these make the dichotomy, smart v dumb, false or meaningless.

    Another example.

    The play, 'Macbeth' is neither edible nor poisonous. Nevertheless, the dichotomy between poisonous and edible is an important one.
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment