4 ms·

A false dichotomy is when two opposing views are expressed as the only options. I am comparing a real solution (science) with a phony one (emotions). Can a war

A false dichotomy is when two opposing views are expressed as the only options. I am comparing a real solution (science) with a phony one (emotions). Can a warm fuzzy doctor cure cancer with science? Yes. Can a warm fuzzy doctor cure cancer with emotions and no science? No. So, this is not a false dichotomy. The climate can not be changed by feeling different about it. Is there a solution to climate change that does not involve science? I would argue no.

IanCal 7y ago
You put up a false dichotomy because none of us are saying it's a choice between emotions and science. What they're talking about is how important emotions are when dealing with humans, and you need to deal with humans to solve this problem.
- RobertRoberts 7y ago
  The climate issue would end tomorrow if the government made it illegal and started arresting people. So it's not a problem with the people. It's a childish ploy to play with emotions, and you will end up with a childish solution playing this game. Science has won over millions of people with the truth time and time again. To pretend like this issue can only be solved by emotions is a giant lie. We have history to demonstrate this.
  - IanCal 7y ago
    > The climate issue would end tomorrow if the government made it illegal and started arresting people. So it's not a problem with the people. If the government made all CO2 emissions illegal tomorrow people wouldn't be able to go to work or feed their families, you'd have massive riots and the government would either change their minds or be thrown out. > To pretend like this issue can only be solved by emotions is a giant lie. Yet again, absolutely nobody is saying this.
    - RobertRoberts 7y ago
      Yes, the economy would be impacted, but the problem of the climate would be solved. A real solution. Why not start there and work backwards towards a solution that will be acceptable? How would people feel about saving the entire human race? Maybe that's the problem, it's "feelings", not real solutions. > Yet again, absolutely nobody is saying this. They actually are, it's just subtle so maybe you aren't noticing it. There's an attempted shift in the discussion away from very, very real solutions to emotional manipulation.
damnyou 7y ago
There's no solution to climate change that does not involve science. However, there's no solution to climate science that doesn't involve engaging with humans either. Pathos is a fundamental part of engaging with humans.

IanCal 7y ago

You put up a false dichotomy because none of us are saying it's a choice between emotions and science. What they're talking about is how important emotions are when dealing with humans, and you need to deal with humans to solve this problem.

RobertRoberts 7y ago
The climate issue would end tomorrow if the government made it illegal and started arresting people. So it's not a problem with the people. It's a childish ploy to play with emotions, and you will end up with a childish solution playing this game. Science has won over millions of people with the truth time and time again. To pretend like this issue can only be solved by emotions is a giant lie. We have history to demonstrate this.
- IanCal 7y ago
  > The climate issue would end tomorrow if the government made it illegal and started arresting people. So it's not a problem with the people. If the government made all CO2 emissions illegal tomorrow people wouldn't be able to go to work or feed their families, you'd have massive riots and the government would either change their minds or be thrown out. > To pretend like this issue can only be solved by emotions is a giant lie. Yet again, absolutely nobody is saying this.
  - RobertRoberts 7y ago
    Yes, the economy would be impacted, but the problem of the climate would be solved. A real solution. Why not start there and work backwards towards a solution that will be acceptable? How would people feel about saving the entire human race? Maybe that's the problem, it's "feelings", not real solutions. > Yet again, absolutely nobody is saying this. They actually are, it's just subtle so maybe you aren't noticing it. There's an attempted shift in the discussion away from very, very real solutions to emotional manipulation.

damnyou 7y ago

There's no solution to climate change that does not involve science. However, there's no solution to climate science that doesn't involve engaging with humans either. Pathos is a fundamental part of engaging with humans.