A false dilemma is a type of informal fallacy in which something is falsely claimed to be an "either/or" situation, when in fact there is at least one additional option.
The false dilemma fallacy can also arise simply by accidental omission of additional options rather than by deliberate deception. For example, "Stacey spoke out against capitalism, therefore she must be a communist" (she may be neither capitalist nor communist). "Roger opposed an atheist argument against Christianity, so he must be a Christian" (When it's assumed the opposition by itself means he's a Christian). Roger might be an atheist who disagrees with the logic of some particular argument against Christianity. Additionally, it can be the result of habitual tendency, whatever the cause, to view the world with limited sets of options.
Some philosophers and scholars believe that "unless a distinction can be made rigorous and precise it isn't really a distinction". An exception is analytic philosopher John Searle, who called it an incorrect assumption that produces false dichotomies.Searle insists that "it is a condition of the adequacy of a precise theory of an indeterminate phenomenon that it should precisely characterize that phenomenon as indeterminate; and a distinction is no less a distinction for allowing for a family of related, marginal, diverging cases."Similarly, when two options are presented, they often are, although not always, two extreme points on some spectrum of possibilities; this may lend credence to the larger argument by giving the impression that the options are mutually exclusive of each other, even though they need not be. Furthermore, the options in false dichotomies typically are presented as being collectively exhaustive, in which case the fallacy may be overcome, or at least weakened, by considering other possibilities, or perhaps by considering a whole spectrum of possibilities, as in fuzzy logic.
Answer:
A TROPHY PRIZE OR CASH AWARD
Explanation:
Answer & Explanation:
1. Kids would love to read "Dog Man" books by Dav Pilkey because the books are comic books and the kids can see what's happening.
2. One thing that shows "Dog Man" books are for any ages is that they have pictures of drawings in them so the kids can see what happens in the story.
3. Dav Pilkey's wildly popular Dog Man series appeals to readers of all ages and explores universally positive themes, including empathy, kindness, persistence, and the importance of being true to one's self.
The sentence that compares the Persian Gulf War to the second World War is option A: We succeeded in the struggle for freedom in Europe because we and our allies remained stalwart.
<h3>What was a direct outcome of the Persian Gulf War?</h3>
The direct aftermath of the war, was that Hussein's army or forces were said to ultimately suppressed the uprisings that was said to have been done by the Kurds in the area of north of Iraq and also that of the Shi'ites in the south.
The United States was said to have led a coalition that was also said to have failed to aid the uprisings, and they were afraid that the Iraqi state would be broken down if they had succeeded.
Hence, The sentence that compares the Persian Gulf War to the second World War is option A: We succeeded in the struggle for freedom in Europe because we and our allies remained stalwart.
Learn more about Persian Gulf War from
brainly.com/question/27024452
#SPJ1
See full question below
Which sentence in the passage compares the Persian Gulf War to World War II?
We succeeded in the struggle for freedom in Europe because we and our allies remained stalwart. Keeping the peace in the Middle East will require no less. We're beginning a new era. This new era can be full of promise, an age of freedom, a time of peace for all peoples. But if history teaches us anything, it is that we must resist aggression or it will destroy our freedoms. Appeasement does not work.
Numerous international human rights documents firmly establish the principle that no human being can be “illegal” or outside the protection of the law. Yet despite the clearly established principle that discrimination and abuse based on immigration status are violations of human rights, U.S. government policies continue to sanction human rights violations against migrants and immigrants.
