This fallacy occurs when the speaker presents only two limited options as the only possible choices, while in reality, there are other options and solutions available.
Definition:
A false dilemma is an error in reasoning in which the speaker pretends that there are only two possibilities or choices, ignoring or concealing the existence of other options. By restricting the range of choices, this form of argument reduces freedom of thought and logical analysis and leads to flawed conclusions. It forces the listener or audience to choose between two extreme positions or two wrong outcomes, disregarding the possibility of considering other alternatives.
Typical structure of this fallacy:
- Either A is true, or B is true.
- A is not true.
- Therefore, B must be true.
Examples from real life:
1. Politics:
“Either you agree with my policies, or you are an enemy of the country!”
Here, it should be noted that someone may disagree with part of the policies while still being well-intentioned towards the country.
2. Education:
“Either you accept this teaching method, or learning will be impossible.”
Here, it should be noted that there are various teaching methods that can be effective.
3. Workplace:
“Either you accept this project right now, or you will never have such an opportunity again.”
Here, it should be noted that better opportunities may arise in the future.
4. Social relationships:
“Either you are always with me, or never with me at all!”
Here, it should be noted that human relationships can have varying degrees and conditions.
Why is this fallacy dangerous?
● It oversimplifies complex issues and prevents the discovery of creative solutions.
● It creates opportunities for manipulation and the imposition of views.
● It places psychological pressure on the listener to make a quick decision without examining all aspects.
How to recognise and respond to it:
Ask yourself or others:
– “Are there really only these two options?”
or:
– “What other possibilities and choices might exist?”
By introducing alternative options, the trap of the false dilemma can be broken, allowing for a more comprehensive view of the issue.
Conclusion:
A false dilemma, by restricting complex matters to “only two options,” distorts sound judgment and decision-making. By presenting more options with clear criteria for evaluation, and through active questioning—“How many possibilities do we really have?”—we can avoid artificial polarisation and move closer to more accurate and fair conclusions.