LOGIC l "False Dilema" l John J. Parsons l Bible Teaching University l Scool of the Bible l NIGHT SCHOOL

Also Known as: Black & White Thinking. A False Dilemma is a fallacy in which a person uses the following pattern of "reasoning": Either p is true or q is true. P is false. Therefore q is true. This line of "reasoning" is fallacious because if both claims could be false, then it cannot be inferred that one is true because the other is false. That this is the case is made clear by the following example: Either 1+1=4 or 1+1=12. It is not the case that 1+1=4. Therefore 1+1=12. In cases in which the two options are, in fact, the only two options, this line of reasoning is not fallacious. For example: Bill is dead or he is alive. Bill is not dead. Therefore Bill is alive. Examples: Senator Jill: "We'll have to cut education funding this year." Senator Bill: "Why?" Senator Jill: "Well, either we cut the social programs or we live with a huge deficit and we can't live with the deficit."   Bill: "Jill and I both support having prayer in public schools." Jill: "Hey, I never said that!" Bill: "You're not an atheist are you Jill?"   "Look, you are going to have to make up your mind. Either you decide that you can afford this stereo, or you decide you are going to do without music for a while."   A limited number of options (usually two) is given, while in reality there are more options. A false dilemma is an illegitimate use of the "or" operator. Putting issues or opinions into "black or white" terms is a common instance of this fallacy. More Examples: Either you're for me or against me.   America: love it or leave it.   Either support George Bush or be considered a terrorist.   Every person is either wholly good or wholly evil.   Proof: Identify the options given and show (with an example) that there is an additional option. << Return

Hebrew for Christians Copyright © John J. Parsons All rights reserved.

LOGIC l "The Complex Question" l John J. Parsons l Bible Teaching University l Scool of the Bible l NIGHT SCHOOL

The Complex Question

This fallacy occurs when a single question that is really two (or more) questions is asked, and a single answer is illegitimately applied to both. Examples: Have you stopped beating your wife?   If you answer, "yes," then you are trapped into the implication that you have beaten your wife in the past; If you answer "no," then you are trapped into the implication that you are still beating your wife! This is really a disguised form of two separate questions: 1) Have you beaten your wife in the past? and, 2) if so, have you stopped now? Resolution: Expose the trap as really two questions posed to look as one.   You should support home education and the God-given right of parents to raise their children according to their own beliefs.   You are asked to agree to both propositions, when you could choose one, either but not both, or perhaps both.   Do you support freedom and the right to bear arms?   Are you going to be a good little boy and eat your hamburger?   Have you stopped using illegal sales practices? Note: A "leading question" is one that begs the question of its truth. It is common in law courts. For example: Tell the court, Mr. Jones, whether on April 9th at approximately 7:25 pm you did see the defendant shoot the deceased? This is a leading question since the answer will be used to corroborate the idea that the defendant did indeed shoot the deceased, whereas a more straighforward (and honest) question would be, "Tell the court, Mr. Jones, what did you see on April 9th at 7:25 pm? - This example from Hurley (156). Proof: Identify the two propositions illegitimately conjoined and show that they are not necessarily logically connected. References: Cedarblom and Paulsen: 86, Copi and Cohen: 96 << Return

Hebrew for Christians Copyright © John J. Parsons All rights reserved.