Example of false analogy

Answer 1

(I'm assuming you already know the definition of a false dilemma; if not, click on the related links below).

Here are a few examples of a false dilemma:

(This page is still an extremely rough draft. Please hit the "improve" button and fix the most glaring flaws, then remove this note.)

Example"we are offered 2 claims: 1+2=4, and 1+2=12. The fallacy is to say that if one claim is false, the other must be true. We know that 1+2=4 is false, therefore 1+2=12 must be true."

This may not be a good example; The problem with the example is that it is too easily seen that both claims are patently false.

A better view of this fallacy would be to present claims that might be true, preferably claims that can be falsified at least in theory, and that are not necessarily or obviously false from the start.

Example"You are either a coke-drinking fascist or a pepsi-drinking socialist"

This statement makes no consideration that someone may be an RC-drinking monarchist, or a Mountain-Dew drinking anarchist. They have set up this false dilemma to attempt to draw their argument in simple black-and-white terms, and pointing out that they are using the false-dilemma logical fallacy is the best way to counter them as it points out the weakness of their argument rather than trying to play on their terms.

ExampleConsider a common and controversial topic here on WA and elsewhere:

An argument is that science can explain (now or eventually) everything about creation and evolution of life. Another argument is that if there are any flaws in science at all, or if a popular theory is overturned, this proves that God is the creator of all things, including life.

There are flaws in scientific theories and in some interpretations of data. Therefore, [a fallacious conclusion would be that] this is proof that God is the creator of all things, including life.

The fallacy is to start with the absolute conviction that one of the two alternatives MUST be true, and there are no other possible alternatives. We are not debating creation; creation either is or is not true. This is not a discussion of theology or religion, and religious responses should go to the discussion page or to other questions. This is simply an outline of a fallacious argument, as requested in the question.

So to be clear, the fallacy is NOT the belief that God is the creator. The fallacy is to conclude that creation is true because there are flaws in science.

example"If the glove does not fit, you must aquit". example"all Cretans are liars" -- Epimenides the Cretan exampleAmbassador Spock: I will not read this or any other statement.

Sela: If you do not, you will die. All of you will die.

Ambassador Spock: Since it is logical to conclude that you will kill us in any event, I choose not to cooperate.

Sela: [fuming] I hate Vulcans. I hate the logic, I hate the arrogance.

example

You can't have your cake and eat it too."

example"America: love it or leave it." example"you are either for us, or against us." example

"Better dead than red."

example"Are you going to admit you are wrong?"

In this example, the speaker implies that there are only two options: either (a) you are wrong and you admit you are wrong, or (b) you are wrong and you stubbornly refuse to admit it.

example"The embryonic stem cells have a good chance cure Parkinson's disease.

Either let scientists extract embryonic stem cells from embryos, killing the latter, or you condemn people to years of unnecessary suffering."

example

"Is light a wave, or is light composed of particles?"

example"How much privacy are you willing to give up for security? Can we even afford privacy in this age of insecurity?" Bruce Schneier (in the article linked below) points out that balancing privacy with security is a false dilemma: it's possible to gain more security without giving up any privacy, and it's also common to be tricked into giving up a little privacy without getting any real gain in security. example

(add another example here)

Answer 2

Lillies:Tulips::Frogs:People

Sorry, that was the only one I could think of.

Answer 3

His argument was ultimately a false dilemma, making it appear that were only two choices.