The False Dilemma
is an informal fallacy (read more about fallacies here), which wreck havoc in the mind by creating confusing in how we process information, by the misuse of an either/or statement while thinking/make an argument.
The confusion is spawned in thought and how we imagine something to be, by creating a wrong mental image of the thing itself, resulting in an error in thought.
Building thought through the misapplication of either/or logic produces a wrong/incorrect spectrum of options. The false dilemma decreases the possible spectrum, while its opposite 'The false compromise', increases the possible spectrum. A false dilemma hides away other angles, while a false compromise adds other angles where non should be.
Identity:
Person 1: Makes a claim "y"
Person 1: Justifies the claim "y" to be an either/or situation
Person 2: Buys the "image", that "y" must be either or, while ignoring/being blind to other possible options.
Example #1
There are only two soccer teams which really matter. So which one do you think is the best soccer team? ("y")
Options: Barcelona or Real Madrid?
Example #2
Credits to youtube user 'the devil' for uploading this video, so others can use it for educational purposes.
Example #3
It is soon election time. Which party do you vote on?
Example #4
Let us order some food. - You want pizza or burger?
Example #5
You can be anything that you want to, but you will need to go to school first.
- Example #5 first gives us a false compromise, where one is tricked into believing that the spectrum of options is without boundaries. Then the example goes on and hides away other options, than school.
To clarify let us say for arguments sake, that I want to be a screw driver or a triangular square - I just need to attend school. Or we can take the scenario where I want to become something that the school spectrum does not understand for varoius reason. E.g. someone who understands what a cryptocurrency is vs. a token.
Illustration:
When buying the idea that there are no other options, one has been fooled to take away options from reality. While this trick may seem harmless or an act of ignorance, it is no joke. The false dilemma will block the carrier of the false dilemma fallacy, for opening up his mind to other possibilities.
In other words. A false dilemma blinds the mind to see beyound a false choice.
Link to older post: The three laws of correct thinking
Premis 1:
When presenting a false version (image) of reality, wherein a false dilemma between options (choices) are embedded, the rule of identity is broken. When reality ("a") is no longer ("a") because it has become another version of it, it can no longer be the same individual (thing). And therefore breaks the law of identity.
Premis 2:
When we break the law of identity we simultaneously produce a contradiction. "a" is now "a" and not "a" at the same. time.
Illustration:
By presenting the "triangle" as a square we break the law of non contradiction. The triangle can not both be a triangle and a square at the same time.
Syntax that governs correct thinking
Using a false dilemma as a conclusion on how something is, forces the premises of such conclusion to be false. When ever premis(es) is used to justify an unreality, it is certain that they must break the laws of reality (natural law) and thereby the laws of correct thinking.
When a premis (cause) is argued to be the cause (premis) of an effect (the conclusion), it is bound to follow that
1: Unreality can not be caused by a true cause. And
2: Reality can not be cause by an untrue/not existing in nature cause.
This also holds true for the fallacy fallacy external link. The fallacy fallacy is just another fallacy, following the same pattern as all other fallacies - Where in one way or another they break the rules of this realm. A fallacy can never be the cause of something (in reality), nor the effect of something (in reality) and is why we should aid ourselves as much as we can and purge fallacies, from our thinking pattern.
Every cause has an effect and every effect has a cause. Breaking the rules of correct thinking can metaphorically be understood as a broken mirror, which no longer reflects anything, because it is broken. The same goes for a cause and its effect. The cause is whatever the mirror should have reflected (the thing itself), if the mirror were not broken. The reflection is the effect. Break the mirror and it will no longer work. Breaking the mirror is what a fallacy does to our mind.
Causation:
The caster of the false dilemma invokes a false paradigme in the mind of the target(s), by concealing other options under disguise of a false dilemma. Hiding away options that do not favor the agenda of the caster (this includes our internal battles aswell, the ego vs. the self)
Effect(s)
Local: The effect of a false dillemma embedded in how we think (specialized)
The target(s) is tricked into accepting/buying a contracted/narrowed down version of reality, that denies the target(s) conscious awareness of options, by altering the presented image of reality in the specific area.
Global: The effect of a false dilemma embedded in how we think (generalized)
The false dilemma has overtaken the target(s) thinking pattern completely, making the target(s) receivable to logical manipulations, which decreases the targets ability to recognize anything outside the already accepted belief system. Only the options that the target has accepted already, as being real, will be allowed access to the conscious part of the mind in the target(s). Thereafter it will dominate the mind, as the only thing/version of reality there is.
This tendency to create a rigid belief system can truly be exploited if the target(s) also is influenced by the appeal to authroity fallacy. Opening the target(s) up to be programmed within a certain spectrum of reality, dictated solely by whom ever the target(s)accept as their authority figure.
The video in this post shows this horrible form of decpetion. This is exaxtly how mass mindcontrol work. It is illusion based and why we all need to learn how to think and perhaps more importantly - Learn how not to think!
From personal experience
Common axioms I have observed in those who suffers from the corruption of the false dilemma thinking patterns, are:
- That is just the way it is,
- that is how things are,
- that is how we do things.
e.g. why do we have to vote for a new master every forth year to be free? 'Well that is just the way things are.' {hiding away other explainations}.
More fallacies:
The straw man
Appeal to authority
note
I have yet to recognize the pattern of which determines exactly when either/or logic should be followed immutably, although I am most persuaded by the idea or perhaps realization, that such a formular can be (re)discovered with some observation. If anybody have any information which is concerned with this subject please give a heads up. I need more information on the subject, to aid in the identification of a rule that can be extruded, which governs this part of language.
To be more specific: The general grammar concerned with application or misapplication of either/or statements - I am almost certain that this subject is fully penetrated by those who write in programming languages, where my hope is that it will be possible to deduct a repeating pattern. Perhaps by categorization of being?