In this strange new world we inhabit, where many people appear to struggle with nuance, the oversimplification of complex problems means that any shades of grey are ignored. This informal logical fallacy, in which every situation is presented as having only two possible options when, in reality, more exist, is now standard in politics and across mainstream and social media. However, rather than being seen as a sign of intellectual weakness, taking entrenched positions is considered perfectly reasonable.
Most popular
Alexander Larman
The inexorable decline of British Airways is a parable for modern Britain
Think 7 October was depraved and insane? You’re Zionist sympathising scum. Appalled by images of children in Gaza made homeless by the conflict, struggling to lift a spoon to their mouth because they’re shaking so violently from the cold? You’re a pathetic Hamas apologist.
Think Brexit hasn’t exactly been a great success? You’re a sad, embittered remoaner. Wonder where all the unaccounted-for billions overseen by unelected EU officials have disappeared to? You’re a Faragist nutjob. And so on.
I’d like to think – although I have no evidence for this – that there is a silent majority who, like me, inhabit the middle ground on most things. Human beings are a mass of contradictions, and I’m no exception. Part liberal, part centre-right, I simultaneously hold contradictory positions on many topics. For example, I don’t believe in the death penalty, for the simple reason that, in my opinion, the average politician shouldn’t be left in charge of a doughnut stand at a car-boot sale, never mind being allowed to legislate back into existence the state’s right to kill people, usually in a macabre fashion. But do I read stories about people I think deserve to be shot? You bet. And if someone had harmed a loved one of mine, I’d want to be the person pulling the trigger.
My position on the introduction of gay marriage was unequivocal – I was entirely in favour. Why would you deny two people of the same sex who love each other the same right as everyone else to solemnise their union, and I’m glad that homosexuality is now hardly worthy of comment. But I take a dim view of encouraging children who are confused about their gender down a path that is potentially harmful to both their minds and their bodies.
Do I believe in uncontrolled immigration? No – it would lead to economic and social catastrophe. Do I think a certain level of immigration is not only necessary, but also desirable? Without doubt. You only have to look at our most successful immigrant communities to see the benefits. You get the idea.
However, many seem unable to cope with cognitive dissonance and instead seek the security of moral absolutes. The inability to deal with ambiguity – whether in themselves or in life generally – is leading to a world in which people hold a completely binary view of everything and are unable, or unwilling, to reach consensus. The consequences are potentially devastating, and we’re already seeing examples of the damage this causes, such as extreme political polarisation leading to violence.
Human beings are a mass of contradictions, and I’m no exception
To move beyond this age of false dichotomies, which is causing serious societal harm, we need to reach a point where finding common ground is once again considered the most desirable outcome. To do so, people must relearn how to accept life’s complexities. Life isn’t simply a matter of either-or – right versus wrong – it is, and always has been, more subtle than that. These distinctions should be embraced, not rejected. They add depth and meaning to our existence. Without them, we become myopic, miss the bigger picture, and rob ourselves of a more complete understanding of the world.
Plato sought to overcome false dichotomies through dialectical rhetoric. Rather than accepting mere opinion or belief, he advocated pursuing genuine knowledge through rigorous questioning, dialogue, and logical argument to arrive at episteme – true knowledge. He sought a comprehensive understanding of a subject rather than limiting himself to a single point of view, and he accepted the limits of his own knowledge. Education in private and grammar schools was once heavily classical, with students studying the works of Aristotle, Cicero, Plato, and others. They learned structured argument, moral reasoning, and how to distinguish persuasion from truth. These skills have now all but disappeared. To reverse the emotional manipulation, moral absolutism, and factionalism we see all around us, they desperately need to be taught again as part of every school’s curriculum.
Instead of sleepwalking towards a future in which we are unable to think critically, we must once more embrace life’s complexities to recover depth, meaning, and perspective. Nuance is essential for that journey, guiding us towards a clearer view of the world as it actually is.
Comments