Logical Fallacy of Equating Opposites

Equating opposites 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 Equating Opposites occurs when an argument is made that two opposites are the same thing. One of the ways this is done is by substituting nonessential characteristics for their essential characteristics until all differences are obliterated. See the fallacy of false analogy. This fallacy can be committed in a metaphor, a simile, an allegory, an analogy, an innuendo, or by making a plain statement of equality. Equating opposites is the extreme end of this fallacy. Ignoring differences or the greyness fallacy may admit some differences while ignoring others. The things being compared may not be opposites, but they are different.

Examples of the Logical Fallacy of Equating Opposites

Sandy: "When you say Christ reveals things to you, that is the same as when I say I assume."

What Sandy is saying is that the flesh (assumption) is the same as the Holy Spirit (Divine revelation. God reveals the flesh lusts against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other. They are opposites. Of course, Sandy makes this unsupported assertion based on a worldview, a fake-reality that seems to Sandy to be more real than reality itself. This is an example of comparing opposites. The fallen human mind is in rebellion against the Holy Spirit--even the natural minds of Christians. It is the natural mind because it is still in its fallen state, and it is deceitful and disparately wicked to the point where you can't trust it. Those who are born again also have a measure of the mind of Christ, which is at enmity with the natural mind. This explains the inner conflict. Christ cannot be deceitful, nor can He be wicked.

Sandy: "Evolution is science."

Most people will interpret Sandy's sentence in a way that makes it a fallacy of ignoring differences. If the word, "evolution" is used to mean a story about molecules turning into people over billions of years, then it is merely a story based on arbitrary assumptions and confirmation bias. Stories like this fall into the category of historical science. It is told in a way to try (unsuccessfully) to be compatible with most of what can be observed. If the word, "evolution," is used to mean small changes in living things that occur from generation to generation, then it is an observation of observational science. However, most people don't think that deeply. They think that somehow molecules-to-man evolution has been observed. They think that science is carefully testing and observing to know of a certainty that something is true, like the fact that a transistor works to do what transistors do. So, by most peoples' interpretation of the words, "evolution," and "science," the two are vastly different from each other. Molecules-to-man history has not been observed, cannot be observed, and cannot be tested. The stories can be tested for feasibility only, and they fail that test. Science, as most people understand it, observes and tests repeatedly until it is very certain that a certain mechanism, reaction, or what have you, always works in the same way. Knowing in this types of science involves control over the entire process from beginning to end so that it can be repeated and confirmed by many people.