Logical Fallacy of the False Excluded Middle / No Middle Ground / Polarization Fallacy

False excluded middle is one of the many smokescreens that are used to cover the fact that the reasoning is based on one of the three fallacies of Agrippa's trilemma. Whenever a logical fallacy is committed, the fallacy has its roots in Agrippa's trilemma. All human thought (without Divine revelation) is based on one of three unhappy possibilities. These three possibilities are infinite regress, circular reasoning, or axiomatic thinking. This problem is known as Agrippa's trilemma. Some have claimed that only logic and math can be known without Divine revelation; however, that is not true. There is no reason to trust either logic or math without Divine revelation. Science is also limited to the pragmatic because of the weakness on human reasoning, which is known as Agrippa's trilemma.

The Logical Fallacy of the False Excluded Middle / No Middle Ground / Polarization Fallacy occurs when the two extreme positions are presents and an either/or proposition, but it excludes the middle ground of everything between the extremes. This is a type of false dichotomy.

Examples of the Logical Fallacy of the False Excluded Middle / No Middle Ground / Polarization Fallacy

"I am a failure."

This could stated as, "I always fail," or, "Every time I try to do something it doesn't work out," or "Nothing works for me." It is a polarization fallacy. It excludes the middle ground.

NightCrawler: "Okay, so I keep hearing over and over again that either the whole bible is true, or it is all false. I am sick and tired of hearing it. It is [a word was excluded]. You know it, you know the implications, you know the realistic applications, and (of course) you cannot find any single thing that fits such a statement."

There are many fallacies in this statement, but we will concentrate on polarization. This person is committing a polarization fallacy while accusing others of committing a polarization fallacy. The polarization is in taking the extreme position of not only saying that there are errors in Scripture but also saying that "you cannot find any single thing that fits such a statement." There is, in fact,  a single think that fits such a statement. God says that the Bible is His Word and that it is without error. This is absolute. God speaks into the innermost minds (hearts) of those who follow Him, and He tells them that the Bible is without error. Then, He speaks to them through the Bible. Those who try to understand the Bible without the benefit of revelation have to deal with Agrippa's Trilemma, which eliminates the possibility of sound reasoning. Those who bring examples of supposed errors also do so using the three irrational methods of Agrippa's Trilemma. If you take time to look into their claims, every one of them is based on infinite regress, circular reasoning, or axiomatic thinking. Sometimes, there is a combination of all three.

Fallacy Abuse

NightCrawler: "Okay, so I keep hearing over and over again that either the whole bible is true, or it is all false. I am sick and tired of hearing it. It is [a word was excluded]. You know it, you know the implications, you know the realistic applications, and (of course) you cannot find any single thing that fits such a statement."

This is a polarizing statement that is opposing another polarizing statement. There actually is no middle ground between the two statements. This is a true dichotomy in that it is mutually exclusive to say, "There are errors in the Bible," and "There are not errors in the Bible." Of course, we rule out errors in translations, since we have the original text. There are errors in translation. Translations disagree with each other. The Bible can only be understood by Divine revelation.

NightCrawler is accusing anyone who notes that the Bible is without error of committing the logical fallacy of the false excluded middle, the polarization fallacy. He/she is claiming there is some middle ground it seems at first. However, he/she then seems to claim a universal negative, that there is not a single thing that is true in the Bible (or something like that--it's difficult to know what NightCrawler actually meant to write). We will ignore that for now and concentrate on the fallacy that we are describing. NightCrawler seems to be claiming that there is a middle ground between no errors and errors. There actually is no middle ground. If there are actual errors, then the text cannot be trusted. If the text cannot be trusted, a person who follows Christ must inquire of God without the benefit of the Bible. The Bible would then hold no weight. God could do that, and He often does do that. In Muslim countries, where it is dangerous to own a Bible, Muslims are turning to Christ largely because He is appearing to them in dreams and in visions and directing them. God speaks through many means. One of His means is the Bible, and He has chosen to make it the one place we can go that is authoritative. It cannot be broken. Ungodly people have tossed mud at it through the centuries to see if something would stick, and they always run into Agrippa's Trilemma.