Fallacies of Presumption False Dilemma, Excluded Middle, False Dichotomy, Bifurcation

Summary Fallacy Name:False Dilemma Alternative Names:Excluded MiddleFalse DichotomyBifurcation Fallacy Category:Fallacies of Presumption Suppressed Evidence Explanation The False Dilemma fallacy occurs when an argument offers a false range of choices and requires that you pick one of them. The range is false because there may be other, unstated choices which would only serve to undermine the original argument. If you concede to pick one of those choices, you accept the premise that those choices are indeed the only ones possible. Usually, only two choices are presented, thus the term False Dilemma; however, sometimes there are three (trilemma) or more choices offered. This is sometimes referred to as the Fallacy of the Excluded Middle because it can occur as a misapplication of the Law of the Excluded Middle. This law of logic stipulates that with any proposition, it must be either true or false; a middle option is excluded. When there are two propositions, and you can demonstrate that either one or the other must logically be true, then it is possible to argue that the falsehood of one logically entails the truth of the other. That, however, is a tough standard to meet - it can be very difficult to demonstrate that among a given range of statements (whether two or more), one of them absolutely has to be correct. It certainly isnt something which can simply be taken for granted, but this is precisely what the False Dilemma Fallacy tends to do.  « Logical Fallacies | Examples and Discussion  » This fallacy can be considered a variation on the fallacy of Suppressed Evidence. By leaving out important possibilities, the argument is also leaving out relevant premises and information which would lead to better evaluation of the claims. Usually, the False Dilemma fallacy takes this form: 1. Either A or B is true. A is not true. Therefore, B is true. As long as there are more options than A and B, then the conclusion that B must be true cannot follow from the premise that A is false. This makes an error similar to that found in the fallacy of Illicit Observation. One of the examples of that fallacy was: 2. No rocks are alive, therefore all rocks are dead. We can reword it to: 3. Either rocks are alive or rocks are dead. Whether phrased as an Illicit Observation or as a False Dilemma, the error in these statements lies in the fact that two contraries are presented as if they were contradictories. If two statements are contraries, then it is impossible for both of them to be true, but it is possible for both to be false. However, if two statements are contradictories, it is impossible for them to both be true or both be false. Thus, when two terms are contradictories, the falsehood of one necessarily implies the truth of the other. The terms alive and lifeless are contradictories - if one is true, the other must be false. However, the terms alive and dead are not contradictories; they are, instead, contraries. It is impossible for both to be true of something, but it is possible for both to be false - a rock is neither alive nor dead because dead assumes a prior state of being alive. Example #3 is a False Dilemma fallacy because it presents the options alive and dead as the only two options, on the assumption that they are contradictories. Because they are actually contraries, it is an invalid presentation.  « Explanation | Paranormal Examples  » Belief in paranormal events can easily proceed from a False Dilemma Fallacy: 4. Either John Edward is a con-man, or he really can communicate with the dead. He seems too sincere to be a con-man, and Im not so gullible that I can be easily fooled, therefore he communicates with the dead and there is an afterlife. Just such an argument was often made by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle in his defenses of spiritualists. He, like so many of his time and ours, was convinced of the sincerity of those who claimed to be able to communicate with the dead, just as he was convinced of his own superior abilities to detect fraud. The argument above actually contains more than one False Dilemma. The first and most obvious problem is the idea that Edward must either be lying or genuine - it ignores the possibility that he has been fooling himself into thinking that he has such powers. A second False Dilemma is the unstated assumption that either the arguer is very gullible or can quickly spot a fake. It may be that the arguer is indeed good at spotting fakes, but doesnt have the training to spot fake spiritualists. Even skeptical people assume that they are good observers when they arent - thats why trained magicians are good to have in such investigations. Scientists have a poor history of detecting fake psychics because in their field, they are not trained to detect fakery - magicians, however, are trained in exactly that. Finally, in each of the false dilemmas, there is no defense of the option which is rejected. How do we know that Edward isnt a con-man? How do we know that the arguer isnt gullible? These assumptions are just as questionable as the point under contention, so assuming them without further defense results in begging the question. Here is another example which uses a common structure: 5. Either scientists can explain the strange objects seen in the sky over Gulf Breeze, Florida, or these objects are piloted by visitors from outer space. Scientists cannot explain these objects, so they must be visitors from outer space. This sort of reasoning actually leads people to believe many things, including that we are being watched by extraterrestrials. It is not uncommon to hear something along the lines of: 6. If scientists (or some other authority) cannot explain event X, then it must be caused by (insert something unusual - aliens, ghosts, gods, etc.). But we can find serious fault with this reasoning even without denying the possibility of gods or ghosts or visitors from outer space. With a little reflection we can realize that it is quite possible that the unexplained images have ordinary causes that scientific investigators have failed to discover. Additionally, perhaps there is a supernatural or paranormal cause, but not the one being offered. In other words, if we think a little bit deeper, we can realize that the dichotomy in the first premise of this argument is false. Digging deeper will also often reveal that the explanation being offered in the conclusion does not fit the definition of explanation very well anyway. This form of the False Dilemma fallacy is very similar to the Argument from Ignorance (Argumentum ad Ignorantium). Whereas the false dilemma presents the two choices of either scientists know what is going on or it must be supernatural, an appeal to ignorance simply draws conclusions from our general lack of information on the topic.  « Examples and Discussion | Religious Examples  » The False Dilemma Fallacy can come very close to the Slippery Slope fallacy. Here is an example from the forum illustrating that: 7. Without God and the Holy Spirit we all have our own ideas of what is right and wrong, and in a democratic system the majority opinion determines right and wrong. Someday they might vote in that there can only be so many kids per household, like in China. Or they can take guns away from citizens. If people dont have the Holy Spirit to convict them of what sin is, anything can happen! The last statement is clearly a False Dilemma - either people accept the Holy Spirit, or an anything goes society will be the result. There is no consideration given to the possibility of people creating a just society on their own. The main body of the argument, however, could either be described as a False Dilemma or as a Slippery Slope fallacy. If all that is being argued is that we must choose between believing in a god and having a society where the government dictates how many children we are allowed to have, then we are being presented with a false dilemma. However, if the argument is actually that rejecting belief in a god will, over time, lead to worse and worse consequences, including the government dictating how many children we may have, then we have a Slippery Slope Fallacy. There is a common religious argument, formulated by C. S. Lewis, which commits this fallacy and is similar to the above argument regarding John Edward: 8. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic - on the level with a man who says he is a poached egg - or he would be the devil of hell. You must take your choice. Either this was, and is, the Son of God, or else a madman or something worse. You can shut Him up for a fool or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. This is a trilemma, and has become known as the Lord, Liar or Lunatic Trilemma because it is repeated so often by Christian apologists. By now, however, it should be clear that just because Lewis has only presented us with three options does not mean we have to sit by meekly and accept them as the only possibilities. Yet we cannot merely claim that it is a false trilemma - we have to come up with alternative possibilities while the arguer demonstrates that the above three exhaust all possibilities. Our task is easier: Jesus might have been mistaken. Or Jesus was severely misquoted. Or Jesus has been grossly misunderstood. We have now doubled the number of possibilities, and the conclusion no longer follows from the argument. If someone offering the above wishes to continue, she must now refute the possibility of these new alternatives. Only after it has been shown that they are not plausible or reasonable options can she return to her trilemma. At that point, we will have to consider whether still more alternatives can be presented.  « Paranormal Examples | Political Examples  » No discussion of the False Dilemma Fallacy can ignore this famous example: 9. America, love it or leave it. Only two options are presented: leaving the country, or loving it - presumably in the way that the arguer loves it and wants you to love it. Changing the country is not included as a possibility, even though it obviously should be. As you might imagine, this sort of fallacy is very common with political arguments: 10. We must deal with crime on the streets before improving the schools.11. Unless we increase defense spending, we will be vulnerable to attack.12. If we dont drill for more oil, we will all be in an energy crisis. There is no indication that alternative possibilities are even being considered, much less that they might be better than what has been offered. Here is an example from the Letters to the Editor section of a newspaper: 13. I dont believe any sympathy should be offered to Andrea Yates. If she were really that seriously ill, her husband should have had her committed. If she wasnt ill enough to be committed, then she was obviously sane enough to have made the decision to distance herself from her children and seek mental help with determination. (Nancy L.) Clearly there are more possibilities than what are offered above. Perhaps no one noticed how bad she was. Perhaps she suddenly got much worse. Perhaps a person sane enough not to be committed is not also sane enough to find help on her own. Perhaps she had too great a sense of duty towards her family to consider distancing herself from her children, and that was part of what led to her breakdown. The False Dilemma Fallacy is unusual, however, in that it is rarely sufficient to merely point it out. With the other Fallacies of Presumption, demonstrating that there are hidden and unjustified premises should be enough to get the person to revise what they have said. Here, however, you need to be willing and able to offer alternative choices which have not been included. Although the arguer should be able to explain why the offered choices exhaust all possibilities, you will probably have to make a case yourself - in doing so, you will be demonstrating that the terms involved are contraries rather than contradictories.  « Religious Examples | Logical Fallacies »

The Colony Collapse Disorder Affecting The Worldwide Bee

The Colony Collapse Disorder Affecting the Worldwide Bee Population As the Belgian writer Maurice Maeterlinck once said: ‘‘If the bee disappeared off the surface of the globe then man would only have four years of life left. No more bees, no more pollination, no more plants, no more animals, no more man.’’ The abovementioned quote that was used by the famous astrophysicist Albert Einstein many years later proves that the importance of honeybees in our ecosystems is a known fact since the beginning of the 20th Century. It has been 15 years that the worldwide bee population’s decline, the colony collapse disorder (CCD), is at an alarming rate, which concerns the whole scientific domain. Many companies, environmentalist groups and†¦show more content†¦Another research, conducted by Simon Potts, is also critical about the disappearance of bees, claiming that they are responsible for 80% of the fruits pollination and 75% of the crops around the world and that a possible extinction is dangerous because pollination would totally rely on butterflies. However, the latter states that there are no clear studies on the impact of pollination on crop yields so it is not possible to claim that crops growth will become unsustainable if there ever is an extinction. He finally qualified the economic value of bee’s pollination, by estimating their production to 253 billion of euros. Therefore, an extinction would lead to a global market crash and influence the economy of many countries that rely on agriculture as a predominant economic activity. Potts’ work allows understanding that the current honeybee crisis is not only dangerous for mankind because of its environmental consequences, but also for the economic impact that would occur. Many researchers decided to take a different stance than Potts and Daftardar, by examining the multiple factors of the decline of the honeybee population. For example, Natalia Sanchez explains in her article that, historically, scientists were looking for the cause of the bee’s sudden poor immune system after the Israeli Acute Paralysis Virus (IAPV) was blamed for the global colony collapse disorder.Show MoreRelatedColony Collapse Disorder1901 Words   |  8 PagesThe Buzz on Colony Collapse Disorder Denise Collins According to the National Geographic News website, the domestic honey bee population has decreased 50% in as many years (Roach, 2004). Many reasons are blamed for the decrease in honey bee numbers including diseases and pesticides. Scientists have given the decline in honey bee population phenomenon a name, Colony Collapse Disorder. While some experts maintain that Colony Collapse Disorder is a nuisance and not a catastrophe, it is a seriousRead MoreSummary : Bee Disappearance 1708 Words   |  7 PagesMadison Manchester Mrs. Kopcak English 12 8 May 2016 Senior Paper: Bee Disappearance Seven years ago honeybee colonies were reported to be dying en masse. They were dying from multiple causes, and these bee disappearances reflect an infertile landscape and a dysfunctional food system. The problem is that in the last 50 years bees have been dying and we’re planting more crops that require bees pollination. Colony Collapse Disorder, Varroa mites, and our farming practices attribute to these disappearancesRead MoreEssay about Agricultural and Ecological Role of the Honey Bee1976 Words   |  8 PagesHoney bee foragers perform waggle dances to inform other foragers in the hive about the location, presence, and the odor of beneficial food sources and new hive sites. The aim of the study in review was to investigate how the characteristics of waggle dances for natural food sources and environmental factors affect dance follower behavior. Due to the assumption that food source profitability tends to decrease with increasing foraging distance, a hypothesis that the a ttractiveness of a dance, measuredRead MoreSexually Transmitted Diseases35655 Words   |  143 PagesDDT may biomagnify, which causes progressively higher concentrations in the body fat of animals farther up the food chain. The near-worldwide ban on agricultural use of DDT and related chemicals has allowed some of these birds, such as the peregrine falcon, to recover in recent years. A number of the organochlorine pesticides have been banned from most uses worldwide, and globally they are controlled via the Stockholm Convention on persistent organic pollutants. These include: aldrin, chlordane, DDTRead MoreOrganisational Theory230255 Words   |  922 Pagesthen be rejected as false. This ‘empiricist’ idea has long been the keystone of much scientific thinking and practice. It is also the keystone of much common sense epistemology – ‘the facts speak for themselves’. Without that keystone, positivism collapses. For positivists, if a phenomenon cannot be directly accessed through our sensory apparatus, if it cannot be observed in some way, then we must question whether or not it exists. Things that cannot be observed must be the result of superstition,Read MoreLogical Reasoning189930 Words   |  760 Pagesbank or a financial bank. Therefore, the term bank occurs ambiguously. However, that same word does not occur ambiguously in the following sentence: Leroy is at the bank frantically trying to withdraw his savings before the financial system collapses. The river bank interpretation would now be too strange, so the word bank here means financial bank.71 The other words that occur in the sentence give strong clues as to which sense is meant. These surrounding words are part of the context of

A Brief History of Stephen Hawking Free Essays

Today I will introduce a famous and outstanding scientist to you. A brief history of Stephen Hawking. The main contents include four aspects Stephen William Hawking is an English theoretical physicist and cosmologist, whose scientific books and public appearances have made him an academic celebrity. We will write a custom essay sample on A Brief History of Stephen Hawking or any similar topic only for you Order Now Stephen William Hawking was born on 8 January 1942 (300 years after the death of Galileo) in Oxford, England. His parents’ house was in north London, but during the Second World War Oxford was considered a safer place to have babies. When he was eight, his family moved to St Albans, a town about 20 miles north of London. At 11 Stephen went to St Albans School, and when he was 17 he went on to University College, Oxford, his father’s old college. Stephen wanted to do Mathematics, although his father would have preferred medicine. Mathematics was not available at University College, so he did Physics instead. After three years and not very much work he was awarded a first class honours degree in Natural Science. Stephen then went on to Cambridge to do research in Cosmology, there was no-one working in that area in Oxford at the time. His supervisor was Denis Sciama, although he had hoped to get Fred Hoyle who was working in Cambridge. After gaining his Ph. D. he became first a Research Fellow, and later on a Professorial Fellow at Gonville and Caius College. After leaving the Institute of Astronomy in 1973 Stephen came to the Department of Applied Mathematics and Theoretical Physics, and from 1979 to 2009 he held the post of Lucasian Professor of Mathematics for 30 years. The chair was founded in 1663 with money left in the will of the Honorable Henry Lucas, who had been the Member of Parliament for the University. It was first held by Isaac Barrow, and then in 1669 by Isaac Newton. Stephen Hawking has worked on the basic laws which govern the universe. He showed that Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity implied space and time would have a beginning in the Big Bang and an end in black holes. These results indicated it was necessary to unify General Relativity with Quantum Theory. One consequence of such a unification that he discovered was that black holes should not be completely black, but should emit radiation and eventually evaporate and disappear. Another conjecture is that the universe has no edge or boundary in imaginary time. This would imply that the way the universe began was completely determined by the laws of science. Stephen has many technical publications, such as The Large Scale Structure of Spacetime, 1973. This is a book written by Stephen Hawking and George Ellis. They attempt to describe the foundation of space itself and its nature of infinite expansion, mathematically as well as theoretically. The book is too hard to read, he derides it as â€Å"highly technical and quite unreadable† and advises readers to not seek it out. Information Loss in Black Holes is an article about the question of whether information is lost in black holes. He also has three popular books published. The first one is his best seller A Brief History of Time, which stayed on the British Sunday Times bestsellers list for a record-breaking 237 weeks. The book attempts to explain a range of subjects in cosmology, including the Big Bang, black holes and light cones, to the nonspecialist reader. Its main goal is to give an overview of the subject, but unusual for a popular science book, it also attempts to explain some complex mathematics. The second one is Black Holes and Baby Universes and Other Essays, It is a collection of both introductory and technical lectures on the thermodynamics of black holes, but it also includes descriptions on Special Relativity, General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics. This collection of lectures also includes essays on Hawking’s personal life when he was young and, most famously, his disease, motor neurone disease. The book also includes an interview of Stephen Hawking. The third one is The Universe in a Nutshell. The book explains to a general audience various matters relating to his work the part of superstring theory in quantum mechanics. It tells the history and principles of modern physics. It is generally considered to be a sequel to A Brief History of Time. Stephen has many interesting ideas. He is known for his three big ideas. Idea about Alien life, he suspect there could be life and intelligence out there in forms we can’t conceive. Just as a chimpanzee can’t understand quantum theory, it could be there are aspects of reality that are beyond the capacity of our brains. Idea about Time travel, he believes that we can start our time travel through wormholes. He thinks wormholes are all around us, only they’re too small to see. They occur in nooks and crannies in space and time, nothing is flat or solid. If you look closely enough at anything you’ll find holes and wrinkles in it. It’s a basic physical principle, and it even applies to time. Idea about Leaving earth, He said if humanity is to survive long-term, we must find a way to get off planet Earth. It will be difficult enough to avoid disaster in the next hundred years, let alone the next thousand or million; our only chance of long-term survival is not to remain inward-looking on planet Earth, but to spread out into space. Professor Hawking is the recipient of many awards, medals and prizes, Known for Wolf Prize, Prince of Asturias Award, Copley Medal, and Presidential Medal of Freedom. And he is also a Fellow of the Royal Society and a Member of the US National Academy of Sciences. This picture shows President Obama talks with Stephen Hawking before presenting him the Presidential Medal of Freedom on 12 August 2009. The Medal of Freedom is the nation’s highest civilian honour. Stephen Hawking continues to combine family life (he has three children and one grandchild), and his research into theoretical physics together with an extensive programme of travel and public lectures. How to cite A Brief History of Stephen Hawking, Papers