The false dilemma is a fallacy. The false dilemma is called in Latin ‘argumentum ad ignorantiam’: argument from ignorance. In a false dilemma you state that there are only two options from which your audience is forced to choose, when in fact there are acceptable alternatives, but you do not mention that. This can happen out of ignorance, but it can also be a deliberate strategic choice to get your audience in a certain direction that you want.
- What is a false dilemma?
- Definition
- Real dilemmas rarely arise
- Seyss-Inquart: Communism or National Socialism?
- Faith or science?
- Better education or fewer hours?
- Creation or evolution?
What is a false dilemma?
Definition
A false dilemma is also known as false dichotomy or false dichotomy. It is a kind of informal fallacy, a fallacy in which wrong assumptions are made in the premises and therefore incorrect premises are used. A false dilemma involves falsely claiming an ,either/or, situation, when in fact there is at least one other alternative.
Real dilemmas rarely arise
Outside of formal systems (such as logic or mathematics), there are very rarely real dilemmas of the ‘either A or B’ type. There is almost always at least a third option and usually even a multitude of alternatives with different advantages and disadvantages. If a speaker gives the impression that there are only two options, this may be out of ignorance, but it may also be a deliberate strategic choice to move the audience in a direction you prefer. At best, the speaker is trying to distract you from the other options, and at worst, he is trying to put pressure on his audience.
Seyss-Inquart / Source: Unknown, Wikimedia Commons (Public domain)
Seyss-Inquart: Communism or National Socialism?
An example of a false dliemma is the speech of Seyss-Inquart, who became Reich Commissioner of the Netherlands in 1940, at the Ice Club grounds in Amsterdam on June 27, 1941, after Germany went to war with Russia. He told his audience: ,What now?, The Dutch people had to choose between communism or national socialism. Dr. GC Berkouwer wrote about this:
,We can only be grateful that at that time many people realized that the dilemma involved a construction, that it was falsely stated and that there was a third party; neither communism nor nationalism. socialism.,[1]
Faith or science?
According to the Reformatorisch Dagblad, philosopher and Utrecht professor Herman Philipse defends the position that faith is incompatible with science. According to Philipse, you have to choose between an atheist rejection of faith or a fundamentalist rejection of science.[2] Unbiased, objective, neutral science does not exist and will never exist. Just as there are no unbiased, objective, neutral people. (WJ Ouweneel). Man’s thoughts and actions are deeply determined by religious beliefs and opinions, which the philosopher H. Dooyeweerd calls religious basic motives. These basic motives govern our will, our aspirations, our instincts and feelings, as well as our intellectual considerations. The distinction between faith and science is therefore a deceptive one. Science without religious principles is completely unthinkable. So it is not about the contrast between faith and science, but about the contrast between faith and disbelief regarding the existence of God.
Better education or fewer hours?
In the broadcast ‘students in action’ of January 13, 2008 of the current affairs program Zembla, it can be seen that the students who took action against the 1040 hour standard in education at the end of 2007 wanted to take to the barricades again. A survey was conducted among 500 students and the question asked was: ,Better education or fewer teaching hours,. The vast majority of students opted for better education. The spokesperson for the National Action Committee for Students (LAKS) Siewert van Lienden was indecisive and dryly noted: ,Better education through fewer hours,. A clear case of ‘false dilemma’: a choice had to be made between two alternatives that are by no means mutually exclusive.
Ronald Plasterk / Source: EU2016 NL from The Netherlands, Wikimedia Commons (CC BY-2.0)
Creation or evolution?
A false dilemma similar to the false dichotomy between faith and science is that between creation and evolution. Either you believe in a God who is the creator and sustainer of all things, or you believe that all that is came into being from the Big Bang and the evolutionary processes that followed. Ronald Plasterk claimed years ago that ,it is really a choice between God or Darwin,.
Plasterk wrote in a column years ago:
,I agree with the Orthodox that there is a clear choice: Either we exist because God created us in some way, or we are the result of a natural process of random mutations. and selection of the best adapted, in short, evolution. We are meant to be, or we just came into existence. The standard VU compromise that creation and evolution can both be true, because one is a religious and the other a scientific category, that is actually a fluff compromise, a word game without meaning.,[3]
This is a v as dilemma, because there are more options. Delft professor Cees Dekker was first an avid supporter of Intelligent Design but now calls himself a theistic evolutionist, where evolution is a kind of method of creation. God starts something and evolution finishes it.
Notes:
- Dr. GC Berkouwer, At the crossroads, NV Gebr. Zomer and Keunings Uitgeversmij, Wageningen, zj, p. 50.
- http://www.refdag.nl/artikelen/1383206/Christen+zoekt+verbod+ Tussen+Faith+en+Science.html
- http://www.refdag.nl/artikelen/1391923/Het+is+echt+kiezen+ Tussen+God+of+Darwin.html
read more
- Hasty generalization: examples and critical questions
- 4 aspects or characteristics of message (communication)
- Listening skills: active listening and emotional reflection
- Listening skills: listening, paraphrasing and summarizing
- Euthyphro dilemma: consideration from a Biblical perspective