Feel this is a good accompanying piece for all the folk insisting on caping for a Blackwater merc wth a nazi tattoo because he said something they liked.
Feel this is a good accompanying piece for all the folk insisting on caping for a Blackwater merc wth a nazi tattoo because he said something they liked.
That this story needs deep investigation is illogical. The man has had a Nazi tattoo for 20 years, and said he never knew. There are 2 reasonable possibilities:
Either he is extremely dull – a disqualification from office
or
He is a liar — also a disqualification from office.
To dive into the story, is an effort to support what? a person who’s behavior has disqualified him. Or else, he is undisqualifiable, and that’s a interesting point.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma
Now, assuming we all now know what as false dilemma is -
What is the third (or fourth) logical option? I can’t see one.
Your argument is that there are only two choices:
He knew or he didn’t know.
You say, if he knew then he is a liar and unfit for office. That’s fair.
You say, if he didn’t know, then he is extremely dull and unfit for office. This does not follow.
It’s easy to show this by simply stating any possible alternative reason why he wouldn’t know. For example: He could have not known because he care enough to research a dumb tattoo he got when he was a Marine doing dumb Marine things. OR He could have not known because he did research and found something that looked similar but was benign.
Saying 'He didn’t know" means only that “he is extremely dull” is not a rational thing to say. It is a non sequitor, another term you can find on wikipedia if you need.
By presenting your argument as if it is a binary choice when there are other scenarios makes this a false dilemma