logic is broken

  • 🔧 Site instability resolved. You can report double-posts and broken attachments. For bigger issues, use the Technical Grievances thread.
    🇵🇦 Nuestro primer dominio localizado está en español en kiwifarms.pa. Our first localized domain is on Spanish on kiwifarms.pa.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
ArgonianVoter

ArgonianVoter

kiwifarms.net
Joined
Feb 24, 2025
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.
 
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?
 
Last edited:
Richard_Wetpasta said:
Also is this internet and tech related tho?
Click to expand...
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:
"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:
 

Attachments

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.
 
ArgonianVoter said:
The existence of false dichotomy implies the existence of a true dichotomy
Click to expand...
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
 
ArgonianVoter said:
to be fair logical thinking is not far off from Technology, it's literally the backbone.
Click to expand...
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
 
ArgonianVoter said:
So in order to accept false dichotomies we must also accept that genuine, exhaustive dichotomies exist.
Click to expand...
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?
 
"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?
 
Last edited:
Is the dichotomy between true dichotomies and false dichotomies a true dichotomy or a false dichotomy?
*yawn*
 
The Cheese Aisle said:
Is a hotdog a sandwich?
Click to expand...
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.
 
Last edited:
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.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom