Logical Fallacy of the Perfect Solution / Nirvana Fallacy / Perfect Solution Fallacy / Perfectionist Fallacy

The perfectionist fallacy 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 regression, 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. Without Divine revelation, neither logic nor math can be known. 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 Perfect Solution / Nirvana Fallacy / Perfect Solution Fallacy / Perfectionist Fallacy occurs when that which is real is compared to  unrealistic, idealized alternatives, then rejecting a conclusion or solution because it doesn't meet some definition of perfection. It is often suggesting that there is no sense in doing anything since it won't be perfect. It is also the tendency to think that there is a perfect solution when no such thing is available. Sometimes, it takes the form of simple complaining. Note that this does not mean that we can be dogmatic about conclusions that are based only on fallacies.

Examples of the Logical Fallacy of the Perfect Solution / Nirvana Fallacy / Perfect Solution Fallacy / Perfectionist Fallacy

"You may as will prepare your kids to have sex before marriage. They're going to do it anyway."

Some young people will do what is wrong, but many of those who have been taught right from wrong will stay on the right path.

"If God is all-powerful, He would have made the world in such a way that mankind would not have fallen into sin."

This is not an uncommon use of the perfect solution fallacy. In this case, the statement demands that God is not patient enough to have created a world knowing that it would fall away from Him and yet return to Him and never fall away again.

Sandy: "Sure, neo-Darwinism has a few problems, but science doesn't work by perfect solutions. We know unequivocally that Darwinism is fact and that the Book of Genesis is just a story someone wrote that might have some moral application."

Rocky: "How can you be so sure."

Sandy: "You are so sure of your belief that a creator God made everything, and yet you can't answer every question either."

Rocky: "Just because I can't answer every question regarding God and the history of the world doesn't negate God's revelation. What He reveals is absolute but incomplete. For instance, by revelation, I know that God created the very good Heavens and the Earth and everything in them. I know, by revelation, that sin changed everything and is the source of death. God has not revealed how He did some things. So, we are comparing God's revelation to your story of Darwinism. The fact that my knowledge is very incomplete doesn't change revelation. The fact that your knowledge is very incomplete may cause you to wonder if your story is untrue."

Sandy first is forestalling disagreement (a fallacy) by hinting at a perfect solution fallacy. He then uses the perfect solution fallacy to refute revelation. Yet, Sandy's story is just a story.