Current Events > Is there a name for this logical fallacy?

(+) Yeah! (+)

Person: I dont like freezing temperatures.

Galaxy Brain: You say you dont like freezing, but when given the option of being set on fire, you didnt like that either! You dont know what you want!

<_<

---

sounds like false dichotomy, ce's favourite way of arguing
---

So kinda like "You can't decide because you refuse to pick extremes" or basically an argument that presupposes there are only 2 very extreme choices/possible opinions?
---

I'm not sure that it's a fallacy as it looks as though no argument is being made in the first place, just the opinion that the original speaker doesn't like freezing temperatures.
---

I swear, there's a fallacy for everything

---

Joelypoely posted...

I'm not sure that it's a fallacy as it looks as though no argument is being made in the first place, just the opinion that the original speaker doesn't like freezing temperatures.

?
The argument comes from the second person.
---

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma
---

Superlinkbro posted...

I swear, there's a fallacy for everything

It's not as bad as that, but it's annoying af when people misuse them.

Like "If X is happening, what's stopping Y from happening?"
Other person "Slippery slope fallacy!!!"

When really just because X doesn't implicitly lead to Y, that certainly is not evidence that X will not lead to Y.

What often happens:
Person 1: "Because X is true I believe Y will become true"
Person 2: "Slippery slope! You are wrong!"
When really all slippery slope says is that they are not necessarily right.
---

Slippery slope definitely gets the most informal usage, if nothing else. At least its lazy usage, when not outright wrong, is suitable against lazy arguments.

---

joe40001 posted...

Joelypoely posted...

I'm not sure that it's a fallacy as it looks as though no argument is being made in the first place, just the opinion that the original speaker doesn't like freezing temperatures.

?
The argument comes from the second person.

Oh my bad. I thought the conclusion was 'You don't know what you want' which seemed irrelevant to P1 but it's really the implied conclusion of 'You like freezing temperatures'.
---

Joelypoely posted...

joe40001 posted...

Joelypoely posted...

I'm not sure that it's a fallacy as it looks as though no argument is being made in the first place, just the opinion that the original speaker doesn't like freezing temperatures.

?
The argument comes from the second person.

Oh my bad. I thought the conclusion was 'You don't know what you want' which seemed irrelevant to P1 but it's really the implied conclusion of 'You like freezing temperatures'.

"You don't know what you want" is an argument, more explicitly:
"Because your 2 expressed claims, 'I dont like freezing temperatures' and 'I don't want to be set on fire', reject the entire set of what I believe are the possible stances on temperature, I am claiming 'You don't know what you want'"
---

This and quite a number of other fallacies I just lump into a giant container I call "probably trolling but possibly just too stupid to talk to and either way only looking to argue for its own sake" and don't so much worry about which is which since I don't intend to continue the conversation anyway.

---

Person: I don't like cold weather

Universe brain: Actually, cold does not exist. What you mean to say is that you don't like weather in which there is less heat.

---

More like:

Person: I don't like cold weather

Everyone on planet Earth: YOU CAN ALWAYS PUT ON MORE CLOTHES BUT YOU CAN ONLY TAKE OFF SO MUCH HA HA HA YOU LOSE DIE DIE DIEEEEEE

---