False choice

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It has been suggested that this article or section be merged into False dilemma. (Discuss)

The logical fallacy of false choice is a correlative-based fallacy in which options are presented as being exclusive when they may not be. It is often used to obscure the likelihood of one option or to reframe an argument on the user's terms. For example:

"The CIA director has misled the nation using false intelligence; he must either be incompetent or lying."

There is nothing to prevent someone from being both incompetent and a liar, or from being neither (there might be a good, competent reason for the use of false intelligence, and the misleading of the nation might not involve actual lying). However, if one thinks that lying about a matter requires competence in that matter and that misleading is a form of lying, then one may return to the "false choice" or find additional choices. Another example is:

"Nobody shoots anybody in the face unless you're a hitman or a videogamer." ^[1]

This example of the fallacy presents the false choice between a hitman and a videogamer, ignoring both the fact that exclusion is not inherent (i.e. one could be both a hitman and a videogamer, a less-likely scenario) and the fact that there is no logical reason prohibiting non-hitmen non-videogamers from shooting people in the face.

Other famous examples of false choice include "America, love it or leave it," "the freedom or security argument", and the Tim McGraw song "Drugs or Jesus."

The false choice fallacy is also known as Morton's Fork, originating from an argument for taxing English nobles:

"Either the nobles of this country appear wealthy, in which case they can be taxed for good; or they appear poor, in which case they are living frugally and must have immense savings, which can be taxed for good."

In this case, the nobility may enjoy an average lifestyle and maintain moderately large savings; or, they may not have a high enough income to spend or save very much.

The fallacy of this type of argument is that it tries to eliminate the middle ground. A typical false choice is the assertion "You are either for us or you are against us." The chooser is forced to decide between absolute commitment or absolute non-commitment. Thus, the possibility of compromise is discounted. Such absolutism is applicable in science and mathematics, in which problems can have one and only one solution. In philosophy, however, there may be fewer absolutes than in other disciplines.