How to Think Better: Understanding False Dichotomy

Do you remember the dress controversy a few years ago on social media? You know, the one where no one could agree if the dress was blue/black or white/gold?

That controversy brought out some cracks in my marital relationship. Just kidding. We did debate vigorously about it, though.

Turns out, the dress was black/blue. To this day, when I see that photo, it registers in my brain as white/gold.

I was fully convicted of my perception. I argued eloquently and fiercely (at least in my head). I knew I was right.

But I was wrong.

What does this have to do with thinking? A lot, actually.

You see, even though I had a certain perception, that perception did not match the independent reality that existed outside of my perception.

Truth exists, and we can be wrong.

Now, that statement might inflame plenty of fancy pants smart people who don’t like definitive statements.

I would tell those people to go jump off a cliff.

I don’t mean I want them to go hurt themselves. If you’re a fancy pants smart person who is reading this, please don’t hurt yourself.

I’m just pointing out that gravity doesn’t care about our perceptions. There are truths, like the laws of physics, that don’t change from person to person.

One truth is that not all thinking is good. There is some bad thinking out there. A lot, in fact.

Let me give you a fictional scenario. Let’s see if you can find the bad thinking in this scenario:

I cook my husband dinner. I make soup. He’s eaten this type before and loves it. He sits down and begins eating. A minute later, he pushes away his bowl. I ask him, “Why don’t you like my cooking?”

“It’s not that,” he replies.

“Yes, it is,” I argue. “If you don’t eat all of your dinner, that must mean you don’t like my cooking! I worked so hard to make this meal and you won’t even finish it.” An argument ensues.

Did you notice it? In this imaginary situation, I was guilty of presenting a false dichotomy. Sometimes this is called a false dilemma.

But… what is a false dichotomy?

It’s a logical fallacy that only gives two choices when there are other possibilities.

In the scenario, I am making my husband choose between eating all his food or condemning my cooking. In reality, there are lots of other options. He could have a stomach bug. He could be full from lunch. I could have used an ingredient that had gone bad without realizing it.

Any of those causes could explain his reaction to the meal. None of those include my cooking abilities.

We understand how this works on a personal level. If your child asks you to buy a book, saying no doesn’t mean you don’t value reading. You can have a lot of reasons to say no. In that situation, you understand that your child is trying to manipulate you.

But for some reason, we don’t fight fairly with other adults. We are bombarded with false dichotomies, or we are guilty of presenting them to others.

Nowhere do we see more false dichotomies than in political and religious debates. I say debates, because we are more disciplined with our thought processes when we aren’t emotionally charged.

It’s like our brains go from Bruce Banner to “Hulk, SMASH!” when we start arguing.

We aren’t interested in having logical, rational thought. We are only interested in destroying the opponent.

And that’s the exact time when we need our best thinking.

So, what do we do?

We learn to recognize false dichotomies.

If you’re unsure, one good question to ask is, “Is there another possibility here that I may not be considering?” Sometimes, people use a false dichotomy as an honest mistake. Many times, they use them for the same reason as your child: they’re trying to manipulate you.

False dichotomies are dangerous because they allow us to make villains of people while ignoring nuance and individual choice.

We learn when to engage and when not to engage.

If a discussion is going to be emotionally charged and unlikely to change anyone’s mind (so basically, every argument on social media), we might find a better way to discuss the topic or simply choose not to engage.

One example is to invite that person to discuss the topic in person or one-on-one instead of diving into the human sewer of a comments section.

We stop using false dichotomies ourselves.

It’s easier to find false dichotomies in others’ arguments than it is to examine our own thinking. But it’s necessary to promote better thought.

Am I forcing people to choose between two extremes? Can I disagree with a person’s point of view while also understanding their motivations? Do people have to completely agree with me or with another person I view as superior?

These are questions we have to ask ourselves to train our thoughts.

We’ll continue in this series with some other ways we can “think better” by examining common logical fallacies. Other than memorizing a random list of fallacies in English class, many people aren’t taught how to think properly and logically.

But we don’t have to surrender to bad thinking.

We can think better.