logo Kevin's website key image

Pinhead: Often Used, Rarely Works

Discovery Demands 5TP


PINHEADS & SINGLE POINT ARGUMENTS

  • Pinhead arguments or points of view are based upon dualistic thinking. Extreme opposites are posited as the only options or realities.
  • If you understand the 5 Thinking Positions, then you realize that pinhead arguments have validity only in extreme contexts, circumstances, or situations.

SOME FACTS ABOUT PINHEAD ARGUMENTS

  • Single point or pinhead arguments are only valid in extreme situations. Why? Because they do not address variables and variations that occur in developing or changing systems.
  • When arguing for absolutes, then single point arguments can be valid and worth holding.
  • When arguing about daily life, human social systems, or anything in a transformative or changing state, then single point arguments are more ways of avoiding issues and discussions than they are about holding to an absolute truth or virtue.
  • Use single point arguments for the ultimate, not the daily.

FALSE PINHEAD ARGUMENTS

False pinhead arguments are the favorite arguments of internet trolls, newscasters, and politicians.

  • False pinhead arguments are based upon false dualities. That is, the arguments claim only two possible extremes exist in situations that have many possibilities and variables.
  • Pinhead arguments are usually false simply because they are dualistic and do not recognize the 5 Thinking Positions (5TP) that exist in the reality of the situation or subject being addressed.
  • Pinhead arguments are usually wrong because their dualities are not based upon reality but only upon abstract thinking or idealism.
  • Pinhead arguments often consist of both a false good and a false evil. These opposites are false because neither is about the actual reality under discussion. Instead, pinhead arguments are often about distorted, exaggerated, fake, false, feared, imagined, misinterpreted, or misrepresented events. In fact, it is arguable that the good or favored side of the duality of some pinhead arguments is itself an evil for being deliberately false.

EXAMPLE PINHEAD ARGUMENT

  • We must allow chip implants into humans so that parents of children with autism can locate their children before they die or harm themselves.

False: There are other ways to keep track of children. A secure bracelet with the same chip could be put on the child. If placing a secure or unremovable bracelet on a child is illegal, then change that law rather than the more extreme law of allowing a chip to be inserted into the child’s body.

False: The issue of the life or safety of the child is not the same as the issue of chip implants in humans. To equate them is to lie and show a lack of intellectual integrity.

False: This law and right is only being requested for this special circumstance.

Many unfortunate social results have started with good intentions and with the helping of only a very specific minority. However, once the door has been cracked open, then others soon wedge it open farther and more and more exceptions are allowed until the practice becomes more common than the problems it was intended to prevent.

  • Such a progression can be seen with divorce as a means to save a few from a horrible marriage to becoming a means to switch whenever it becomes inconvenient or undesirable for any reason to stay in a marriage.
MENU

kevinfitzmaurice.com