logic is broken

[ArgonianVoter]

The existence of false dichotomy implies the existence of a true dichotomy, a false dichotomy happens when someone presents two options as if they’re the only possibilities, when in fact there are more. it ignores neutrality or alternative stances.

The notion of a false presupposes the notion of a true alternative. a false statement makes sense only because there are true statements. if we meaningfully speak about false dichotomies, it seems to imply that true dichotomies must also exist in order for the contrast to make sense.

A True dichotomy must then be a division where exactly two, and only two, options exhaust the possibilities.

If all dichotomies were false, the category would collapse into redundancy as there is no contrast.

So in order to accept false dichotomies we must also accept that genuine, exhaustive dichotomies exist.

You can already see how this is a problem. "Logic" is Broken.

 

[The Cheese Aisle]

Logic isn't broken, you're doing logic right now

 

[Hellwalker]

Such Internet & Technology with the OP good job.

 

[ArgonianVoter]

Such Internet & Technology with the OP good job.

to be fair logical thinking is not far off from Technology, it's literally the backbone.

 

[Richard_Wetpasta]

Okay

You could fractalize hypothetical options forever if you really wanted to, it only serves to create confusion and subdivide consensus amongst groups or even just yourself. Are you offering genuine alternative options to a hypothetical dichotomy or do you function as an agent to subdivide/sabotage one of the existing options?

In the context of making decisions for yourself wasting the time to create an exhaustive list of options only serves you if you enjoy choice paralysis. Past a certain point do you even have the time to analyze each option?

There's a reason people don't like those who split hairs.

Also is this internet and tech related tho?

 

[Belisarius Cawl]

Also is this internet and tech related tho?

I guess it is because logic underpins every single device being used to access this very forum. I think OP might be a shitpost but on the off-chance it is serious there is a book I intend to read one day:

https://www.amazon.com/Philosophy-Logics-Susan-Haack/dp/0521293294

"The first systematic exposition of all the central topics in the philosophy of logic, Susan Haack's book has established an international reputation (translated into five languages) for its accessibility, clarity, conciseness, orderliness, and range as well as for its thorough scholarship and careful analyses. Haack discusses the scope and purpose of logic, validity, truth-functions, quantification and ontology, names, descriptions, truth, truth-bearers, the set-theoretical and semantic paradoxes, and modality. She also explores the motivations for a whole range of nonclassical systems of logic, including many-valued logics, fuzzy logic, modal and tense logics, and relevance logics."

OP talks about going beyond classical logic (which here I believe means logic from Aristotle up to Boole, de Morgan et al. and maybe not everything in between—in the medieval period, some of the stuff that is talked about here went outside of classical logic IIRC) and of course the volume in question is now heavily discounted:

 

[Private Tag Reporter]

Logic doesn't reflect truth, it only categorizes as true or false. Redundancy is a non-argument in logic. There can exist N, N+1, and N+X forms of a preposition, none of which are mutual exclusive. Dichotomy is just a word which I don't believe has a formal description in this context. The rest is gobbledygook.

 

[skykiii]

Logic isn't broken, you're doing logic right now

I'm sure Logic will be broken once OP is done with it.

 

[User names must be unique]

The existence of false dichotomy implies the existence of a true dichotomy

OP is a faggot
OP is not a faggot

Is a false dichotomy because clearly OP IS a faggot.

The 'OP is a faggot' option is not a false dichotomy just because it doesn't include an exact descriptor of OPs faggotry, we can accept it as broadly true without creating an entire logic array to discover which truckstop you visit to suck dick for cock

 

[Syntaxion]

to be fair logical thinking is not far off from Technology, it's literally the backbone.

It's the backbone of literally everything.
At its core, everything boils down to logic and rules

Might aswel post this in the food board, because cooking is chemistry at its core, which is ALSO dictated by logic

 

[Harvey Danger]

So in order to accept false dichotomies we must also accept that genuine, exhaustive dichotomies exist.

Yeah, because they do. Binary states exist. If you are forced to choose between them then you are faced with a true dichotomy. Additional options orthogonal to the present options don't change this underlying fact.

You must either keep moving, or stop moving. Whatever else you choose to do while moving or stationary, that dichotomy remains.​

​

You may either speak, or stay silent. "What if I think, or act, or sing" doesn't matter, either those count as one of the options (singing as speech), or they are irrelevant to the choice.​

Anyway, what does OP failing his freshman rhetoric class have to do with Internet & Technology?

 

[Make Anime Illegal]

"So in order to accept false dichotomies we must also accept that genuine, exhaustive dichotomies exist."

Yes. Take any statement A. A or not A is a true, geniune dichotomy. For example, "Pi is a real number of pi is not a real number." What's the problem?

 

[DumbDude43]

So in order to accept false dichotomies we must also accept that genuine, exhaustive dichotomies exist.

well, yeah? of course they do.
are you alive or dead? are you a man or a woman? are you married or not?

 

[Belisarius Cawl]

well, yeah? of course they do.
are you alive or dead? are you a man or a woman? are you married or not?

Here's a better one: is a man bald or not, by having so many or so few hairs on his head? If n grains of sand make a heap of sand, will subtracting a single grain of sand disturb that predicate?

There's a wider analysis here:

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/sorites-paradox/

 

[The Cheese Aisle]

Might aswel post this in the food board, because cooking is chemistry at its core, which is ALSO dictated by logic

Is a hotdog a sandwich?

 

[Belisarius Cawl]

Is a hotdog a sandwich?

That is actually another great quandary of philosophy

 

[Kosher Dill]

Is the dichotomy between true dichotomies and false dichotomies a true dichotomy or a false dichotomy?

 

[Gay Sex Enjoyer]

Is a hotdog a sandwich?

A lot of philosophy falls into these kinds of navel-gazing traps where you're just thinking for thinking's sake and descending into more and more layers of bizarre disconnected connections, while any actual practicality falls away.

No, hotdogs are their own separate food category, as are sandwiches. They have similarities in ingredients and even in preparation but they're still in different areas of food thought and treated as completely different dishes. They are this way because they must be. Being any other way serves us no better. These categories are used for a reason, hotdogs and sandwiches do not exist in an intellectual vacuum. They are real physical things, not abstract ideas floating in the ether.

Why ask "is a hotdog a sandwitch?" when simply eating the two tells you the difference? Have you no eyes? No tongue? No hands? The man eating the sandwich does not ask. The man eating the hotdog does not ask. The only man who questions is the one who is eating neither, and such a question is useless even to him. If you ask for a hotdog and someone hands you a taco, do you accept it as the same thing? Do you fall into the idea that they are truly one in the same, as is cooked up in the minds of internet food philosophers? Of course not.

There is no knowledge at the bottom of the hotdog/sandwich well. Only more questions with no answers. Nothing but the empty abyss of the human mind's desire to question, even when doing so brings no wisdom. Reality does not change. A hot dog is a hot dog, and a sandwich is a sandwich.

A is A.

 

[teriyakiburns]

The fallacy in a false dichotomy is not the dichotomy, but the falseness; the artificial restriction to two choices, not the existence of two-choice problems.

Your argument, incidentally, presents a false dichotomy in itself.

This thread should be in deep thoughts.

 

[Trans Fat 41g]

Yep, OP is an Oblivion NPC.