Editing Talk:2592: False Dichotomy

Jump to: navigation, search
Ambox notice.png Please sign your posts with ~~~~

Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.

The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision Your text
Line 6: Line 6:
  
 
I’m pretty sure the cannibalism joke is based on the idea that we have to create a “false dichotomy” between humans and non-human living things, or else we can’t say that it’s okay to eat some things (maybe the line is drawn at plants, maybe at animals) but not others (a category that usually includes humans).  [[User:Pablo360|Pablo360]] ([[User talk:Pablo360|talk]]) 19:03, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
 
I’m pretty sure the cannibalism joke is based on the idea that we have to create a “false dichotomy” between humans and non-human living things, or else we can’t say that it’s okay to eat some things (maybe the line is drawn at plants, maybe at animals) but not others (a category that usually includes humans).  [[User:Pablo360|Pablo360]] ([[User talk:Pablo360|talk]]) 19:03, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
:I don't think it's that specific. Often false dichotomies use something horrible or unthinkable as the alternative, and cannibalism is about as taboo as it gets. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]])
 
 
: no, that's delving too far into a fairly simple joke. "Embracing dichotomies and Cannibalism" is a false dichotomy itself! He could have said anything "skydiving", "poison swallowing", anything... It's the fact it's a false dichotomy used to justify false dichotomies. GET IT?!?!?
 
 
:That makes no sense, humans are demonstrably different from all other creatures, even without arguing human exceptionalism we are a different species which is a very well defined concept--[[Special:Contributions/172.70.110.65|172.70.110.65]] 13:21, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
 
 
I think the title text joke is more based on "There are 2 hard problems in computer science: cache invalidation, naming things, and off-by-1 errors." [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 19:29, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
 
 
Trichotomy is not a portmanteau but a real word by itself, and it means what is supposed to mean, i.e., division in three categories. [[User:Vdm|Vdm]] ([[User talk:Vdm|talk]]) 21:36, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
 
:I had not read this comment, when I dove in myself. I agree, though it is an artificial and (slightly) incorrect swap of di- to tri- so is a relative neologism. I've endeavoured to summarise what I understand of it (wiktionary lacks some of the depth, as you try to drill down, and I'm not sure I can provide full references for my version!) and removed the presumption of being a portmanteau. Which I would rather apply to two independent words being melded together, not a replacement of one prefix (or suffix, or infix) with another equivalently elemental fragmentary affix.
 
:But that's just my opinion. Open to further editing. (Maybe shoving in a Trivia section, also!) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.34.221|162.158.34.221]] 01:09, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
 
:Isn’t the morpheme “-tricho-“ about hair?  So “trichotomy” should mean “haircut”. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.130.153|172.70.130.153]] 23:22, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
 
 
It may be a stretch, but Cueball’s dialogue could be a reference to A Modest Proposal, which satirically creates an extended false dichotomy between poverty and cannibalism [[User:Lordoftheroboflies|Lordoftheroboflies]] ([[User talk:Lordoftheroboflies|talk]]) 23:11, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
 
:{{Citation Needed}} (I don't know what you're referring to :) ) [[User:Kev|Kev]] ([[User talk:Kev|talk]]) 15:22, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
 
:It's a fairly well known piece of satire by Johnathan Swift. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Modest_Proposal [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.69|108.162.245.69]] 23:10, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
 
:It isnt actually a false Dichotomy, it is a satirical argument that it is more moral to eat babies than to let poor people die from starvation/exposure, rather than anything conflating the two as the same. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.211.26|172.70.211.26]] 04:30, 15 March 2022 (UTC)
 
 
Personally I saw the title text as a reference to Monty Python's Spanish Inqusition: "Our chief weapon is surprise, surprise and fear, fear and surprise. Our *two* weapons are fear and surprise, and ruthless efficiency. Our *three* weapons are fear and surprise and ruthless efficiency and an almost fanatical dedication to the pope." [[Special:Contributions/141.101.104.98|141.101.104.98]] 12:16, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
 
 
It is possible that when he refers to "surprise trichotomies," he is referring to the cannibalism-false dichotomy false dichotomy. The third element is vegetarianism.
 

Please note that all contributions to explain xkcd may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see explain xkcd:Copyrights for details). Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!

To protect the wiki against automated edit spam, we kindly ask you to solve the following CAPTCHA:

Cancel | Editing help (opens in new window)

Templates used on this page: