My second Critical Thinking about COVID video looks at the false choice fallacy – specifically, the false choice between economic health and public health. This video series identifies rhetorical techniques and logical fallacies in COVID misinformation, neutralizing dangerous myths while building public resilience against science denial.
This video looks at how we’re often being asked to choose between public health and the economy. But the two are inextricably linked. You can’t have a healthy economy if millions are sick or dying. When people are afraid, they’re less likely to go out and spend money at the risk of getting sick. There’s no reopening the economy without controlling the health crisis.
Two studies are relevant to this dynamic. One is an MIT study published this year found that the cities that shut down earlier and for longer suffered less deaths – and importantly, also made a faster economic recovery – than the cities that opened earlier. The other is a University of Chicago study, also published this year, which found that social distancing has downstream economic benefits. Even moderate social distancing would save 1.7 million lives from COVID-19, which translates to a benefit of $8 trillion to the economy.
Having to choose between public health and the economy is a false choice. Simply opening the whole country while the pandemic is raging won’t result in a healthy economy – people won’t feel safe enough to return to normal. The suffering economy is largely due to the pandemic, not the measures to slow the spread. If we want a healthy economy, we also need healthy citizens.
The false choice fallacy is one of the techniques of science denial that make up part of the FLICC taxonomy of science denial: a detailed landscape of rhetorical techniques, logical fallacies, and conspiratorial traits.
The false choice fallacy, also known as false dichotomy, either/or fallacy, or false dilemma, is a form of oversimplification. It involves presenting two options as the only possibilities, when other possibilities exist.
I addressed this fallacy in an earlier Cranky Uncle video, debunking the climate myth that because CO2 lagged temperature in the past, CO2 can’t drive temperature. This myth falsely assumes that either CO2 drives temperature or temperature drives CO2, when in reality both are true.
In fact, I confess I recycled an animation I created for this previous video, using the analogy of chickens and eggs to illustrate how the false choice fallacy can lead to incorrect conclusions.
Check out the full list of Critical Thinking About COVID videos on YouTube. Thanks to Melanie Trecek-King, Lori Byron, and Robert Byron for their feedback in the writing of this video.
Leave a Reply