Max S Cherry
Seeker
This is not a "false dichotomy" by any means. It is a question posed by a particular individual who may, at his or her leisure, limit the possible courses of actions in desired way.
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Is it better to "turn the other cheek", or to "stand up for yourself"?
False dichotomy.
That´s what´s called a false dichotomy. The person who calls it a false dichotomy sees different courses of actions than the two the person desires to limit the available options to.This is not a "false dichotomy" by any means. It is a question posed by a particular individual who may, at his or her leisure, limit the possible courses of actions in desired way.
That´s what´s called a false dichotomy. The person who calls it a false dichotomy sees different courses of actions than the two the person desires to limit the available options to.
So what, in your understanding, renders a dichotomy false - if not the fact that it presents only two options when others are available?I did not take the question to be a statement of there being only two possible courses of actions. I took the question to be, "Among these two options, which do you prefer?" That you prefer an option not presented does not create a false dichotomy; however, it does create a dichotomy.
It just is not false for the stated purposes if I understood the original question correctly.
What then would that say of the Apostle Peter?He who takes up the sword, dies by the sword.
What then would that say of the Apostle Peter?
Those who stand defenseless in the face of a sword die by the sword.
To the OP question:
I think it important to asses your battles carefully. Turning the other cheek can be a solution to a controversy. However, depending on the intent of your adversary if you turn your other cheek to them after they've had the nerve to strike you a first time they'll simply hold you in contempt as one who likes to be abused. And likely accommodate your invitation to do more harm.
Whereas if you are pushed in that way and you strike back with superior force and strike fear into that enemy chances are if they don't respect you after, it's because they clearly were not respectful when they elected to be offensive. In this case the respect is of little import when you deliver the message that you will not be brutalized at their leisure.
This then demonstrates you have respect for yourself. Making the offenders esteem unnecessary.
So what, in your understanding, renders a dichotomy false - if not the fact that it presents only two options when others are available?
Why would anyone intentionally limit my thinking and considerations that way? Why would anyone present only two options when more are available?
From Wikipedia:
A false dilemma (also called false dichotomy, black-and/or-white thinking, the either-or fallacy, the fallacy of false choice, the fallacy of exhaustive hypotheses, the fallacy of the false alternative or the fallacy of the excluded middle) is a type of informal fallacy that involves a situation in which limited alternatives are considered, when in fact there is at least one additional option. (redding added)
Anyway, beyond semantics nit-picking, you got the idea of my first post, didn´t you?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?