Talk:Dilemma

The description of 'Morton's Fork' is not at all like the content that appears on the full page for 'Morton's Fork'. The description says 'choices yield equivalent, often undesirable, results'; the page says that it's a 'specious piece of reasoning in which contradictory observations lead to the same conclusion'. What is then the name for choices that yield equivalent, often undesirable, results? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rubyru17 (talk • contribs) 23:12, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

transwikied

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)

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)

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)

"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)

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)

Spelling of Dilemma

There seems to be some controversy about the spelling, many people around the world use "Dilemna" instead, and the reason seems quite unknown. I refer you to here: http://northernplanets.blogspot.com/2007/08/dilemna-of-spelling-dilemma.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.215.104.78 (talk) 16:45, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

The answer is obvious; "Dilemna" is Imperial, "Dilemma" is Metric. But seriously, folks, I never came across "dilemma" until a few moments ago when google docs tried to correct my spelling.Paganize (talk) 06:15, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

I blame my backwater school system. I used "dilemna" for a long time, and people couldn't understand why. I'm pretty sure dilemma is the most accepted spelling. Mizusajt (talk) 19:51, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Well if millions use dilemna, than it is a valid word. It shouldn't really matter if the word came about through mistakes, it is now a word. This is how language changes.

A majority of people accepting usage of a word changes the language as a whole. Otherwise it's slang. This website, [1], did a google calculation of usage, 1st comment is by the author in May 2014, so I'll go by that date for his search. He found 3 million uses of "dilemma" and 300,000 uses of "dilmena". He is also selling T-shirts for accepting "dilemna", but concedes that "dilemma" is the correct spelling. A few websites: [2] [3] [4] 20 pages of forum debate, with a few links in there: [5] -204.76.166.50 (talk) 14:41, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Opposite of a dilemma?

What is it called when there are two equally tempting possibilities? Like two plates of food, that are equally delicious and equidistant from you - making it impossible to decide and causing you to starve? Is this also a dilemma, or is it called something else? - Update: I see that this is called the Buridan's ass paradox. It is called a dilemma on it's page, yet it's not mentioned here under the Dilemma topic.Doubledork (talk) 20:49, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Certainly it is a dilemma; you could add it here, if you want to. The key is that the same result will be obtained regardless of whether the donkey eats or drinks (i.e. continued survival of the donkey); the fact that Buridan's ass never chooses doesn't really matter, I don't think. (But I don't know what the opposite of a dilemma is!) — Sam Wilson ( Talk • Contribs ) … 09:35, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

SHOULD HAVE BEEN A CANE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! GO FRED D 2ND TO NONE —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.109.0.21 (talk) 13:45, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Two or more

The 'two choices' definition is one that makes sense based on the definition, as well as other words like trilemma that exist to represent 3 options. That said, we should probably make mention that in common usage, people do frequently use the term 'dilemma' when referring to situations with more than two options. Ranze (talk) 03:59, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Dilemma zone in traffic

How about a mention or link to a dilemma zone before a traffic signal- where a vehicle cannot make it to the intersection before the light turns red without speeding, but also does not have enough stopping distance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.225.17.141 (talk) 19:44, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

This example is probably too specific for this article. It would make sense to mention it as a dilemma in Traffic light#Light_timing_length. I'm not sure I'd call it a "zone", as it depends on vehicle speed and driver reaction time as well as vehicle location. Jruderman (talk) 15:00, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Under the heading "Types" ...

Catch 22 is summarised as: "damned if you do, damned if you don't.".

This is not an accurate summary of Catch 22, which I suggest would be better described as: "You can have Outcome A only if you meet Qualification Z, but you cannot meet Qualification Z because you have not obtained Outcome A."

More problematical is that Catch 22 situations are not a dilemma as defined in the article, as there are no possibilties involved. In fact I might argue that Catch 22 is all about the denial or refutation of possiliblities (within the context).

The description of Prisoner's Dilemma is also unclear. Inability to coordinate ... what? Defection to what?

Any thoughts? Wayne 04:20, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Your suggested summary of "Catch-22" looks like your own brainchild, one I've never seen before... whereas in actual usage "Catch 22" is universally used as code for "damned if you do, damned if you don't" and obviously refers to a choice between two actions that would both lead to damnations or undesired result. 71.246.153.150 (talk) 11:31, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

It's my own braincild inasmuch as I made it up as I was explaining it here. And that is exactly why it is here in discussion and not edited into the article. Note also that I introduced the thought with: "which I suggest ... " That's a bit of a clue that it's just my thought, isn't it?

I'd suggest you read the WP article on Catch 22, ref'd in this article. Or even the book. Possibly the best articulation of the 'principle' of Catch 22 is the discussion in the book, cited in full in the WP C22 article, in which it is noted that for the Air Force crews to get out of flying the dangerous missions on the grounds that they are 'crazy', all they have to do is ask. But if they ask they can't be crazy because asking proves that they are sane, so they wont get out of flying more missions. This is nothing remotely akin to 'Damned if you do, damned if you don't'. What the crews want is to get out of flying more missions, which is not a metaphorical 'damnation', but a positive outcome. The point of Catch 22 is that there are two related but contradictory rules in play.

As for your claim that it's "universally" used that way, in "actual usage", you're kidding, right? Please be kidding. Wayne 05:56, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Quoting from the Dilemma article: "A dilemma...is a problem offering two possibilities, neither of which is unambiguously acceptable or preferable." Quoting from the Catch-22 article: "A catch-22 is a paradoxical situation from which an individual cannot escape because of contradictory rules." It is, therefore, a mistake for Catch 22 to be included as a type of dilemma and I will remove it. According to the two quoted sentences, "damned if you do, damned if you don't" is a summary of a dilemma but not of a catch-22. John Link (talk) 05:00, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

Since "damned if you do, damned if you don't" does describe a dilemma, I will include it in the section "Related terms". John Link (talk) 05:06, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

Why is this sentence in the header?

"Time and or the perception of time strongly influencing the decision-making."

It is confusing and I don't see how it relates to the article at all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 14.203.155.88 (talk) 23:46, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

explain about the horns, and other

Thank you User:Charles Matthews for developing this article. I noticed it at AFD and came from there. Hey, I think something is missing in the current development, which seems to me to over-rely upon readers understanding about "horns", while apologizing at the same time about that being a cliché. I think it is now written as if readers will understand already what the deal about horns is, when some/many will not. And I think it should be more straight-forward and without apology.

Actually, I don't think the article conforms really with my understanding. The first sentence is: "A dilemma (Greek: δίλημμα "double proposition") is a problem offering two possibilities, neither of which is unambiguously acceptable or preferable." That sounds pretty vague to me, and it does not convey that both possibilities appear pretty bad. It at least seems that both are bad, and you are going to get stuck with one or the other. Maybe it will turn out that in fact you don't have to be subjected to either, or one is not so bad, maybe that is how the dilemma is "resolved".

About the horns, I think something more elementary needs to be described, i.e. that it is about facing a bull with horns coming at you. If you can avoid one you will get impaled by the other. I actually don't understand how, physically, one is supposed to escape in-between them, is there room? Through the head of the bull? What resolves the situation, literally, in a story about a bull. In a broad concept article, I think the horns metaphor/analogy should be explained very directly and clearly. I hope these comments are helpful somehow. Again thanks for developing it already. --Doncram (talk) 04:37, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

examples

By the way, I think there is a big long development about horns of dilemma and escaping them somehow which is developed in Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance. There are no hits on "dilemma" in the Wikipedia article about it, and I don't recall much about it, and I don't know if it would be a good example to point to. But some classic examples (e.g. perhaps like "3 famous moral dilemmas" here or historically notable occurrences of dilemmas (like what faced some military leader during a war or whatever) should be included in the article I think.

Truman's decision to drop the nuclear bomb or not might be one, as suggested in this Quora Q and A.

Also, interestingly, Subhanjali Saraswati, Director at Taarikh, History Club commented in that Quora thread, with a non-Western example that might be good to use: "When you are talking of ethical dilemma’s the first thing that comes up is the Arjuna and Krishna debate in Mahabharata, that is also portrayed in the Bhagwat Gita. To do or not to do? To do something even if we know that the moral consequences may not be ideal. and just do it because it is our duty/ obligation to do so. Or not do something because we care about the consequence. In the book there was a clear decision taken. Krishna’s argument prevailed." I personally know nothing about that, but it sounds interesting, just browsing a tiny bit at the Bhagavad Gita Wikipedia article which mentions the dilemma up front. The Mahabharata article also has "dilemma" hits.

Just going on the wording, does Hamlet have some big dilemma about to be or not to be? --Doncram (talk) 04:49, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

There is an article ethical dilemma. According to WP:SUMMARY, the section here on that aspect, which needs to be written, should concentrate on "general summary information". Charles Matthews (talk) 05:34, 22 November 2018 (UTC)