Talk:Dilemma

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This page has been transwikied to Wiktionary.
The article has content that is useful at Wiktionary. Therefore the article can be found at either here or here (logs 1 logs 2.)

Note: This means that the article has been copied to the Wiktionary Transwiki namespace for evaluation and formatting. It does not mean that the article is in the Wiktionary main namespace, or that it has been removed from Wikipedia's. Furthermore, the Wiktionarians might delete the article from Wiktionary if they do not find it to be appropriate for the Wiktionary.

Removing this tag will usually trigger CopyToWiktionaryBot to re-transwiki the entry. This article should have been removed from Category:Copy to Wiktionary and should not be re-added there.

I think it can be a Wikipedia article, discussing various dillemmas, history of this concenpt, some philosophical/logical interpreations, etc. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 11:16, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Judging from the article at hand, it is currently a dicdef. However if it can be expanded past a dicdef, please do so and remove the {{move to Wiktionary}} template. W i k i a c c 14:03, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Two solutions?

A dilemma always has two solutions? Is everyone sure about this? TheQz 17:57, August 23, 2005 (UTC)

Well, it is a 'dilemma, isn't it? --67.109.105.226 08:28, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
To my understanding, in formal logic a dilemma has two choices, but each of these choices leads to the same conclusion. Symbolically:
A \wedge B, A \Rightarrow C, B \Rightarrow C \vdash C
Note that this is (obviously) different from the constructive dilemma (in that the subsequents of A and B are the same). So, TheQz, I don't know if that answers your question; I guess it depends on what one thinks the 'solutions' to a dilemma are!
—Sam Wilson (Australia) 04:05, 8 February 2007 (UTC)


[edit] The point was missed

I was directed to this page from a link on another Wiki page: "damned if you do, damned if you don't." While this phrase does describe a dilemma, it describes a very specific one where:

A \wedge B, and B = NOT A.

(Sorry, don't know enough editting to show a "logical NOT" symbolically)

JimH443 06:32, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

The premises you give are a fallacy; is that the same as being damned? I don't know.  ;-) I think it's interesting that the conclusion to a dilemma is generally thought of as being morally/ethically/whatever somehow 'wrong' or something. In formal logic, of course, there is no such connotation. —Sam Wilson (Australia) (talk) 05:26, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "Impaled on the horns of a dilemma"

I believe the full phrase is "impaled on the horns of a dilemma", as if horns on a bull, but I'm not sure how/where to add this... SJFriedl (talk) 13:49, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Difference between formal and informal usage

I think the difference between these two views or definitions on the conept of a Dilemma should be carfully highlighted in the article. The difference is too big to handle both concepts under one headline. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.236.4.159 (talk) 23:43, 13 February 2008 (UTC)