Nirvana fallacy
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
It has been suggested that this article or section be merged into Perfect solution fallacy. (Discuss) |
The Nirvana fallacy is the logical error of comparing actual things with unrealistic, idealized alternatives. It can also refer to the tendency to assume that there is a perfect solution to a particular problem.
Example: "If we go on the Highway 95 at four in the morning we will get to our destination exactly on time because there will be NO traffic whatsoever."
By creating a false dichotomy that presents one choice which is obviously advantageous—while at the same time being completely implausible—a person using the nirvana fallacy can attack any opposing idea (reformed social welfare programs, for example) because it is imperfect. The choice is not between real world solutions and utopia; it is, rather, a choice between one realistic possibility and another which is merely better.
An example of the nirvana fallacy would be opposing a policy that reduces poverty because it does not completely eliminate poverty. Another example might be achieving perfect competition on the market.
Contents |
[edit] History
The nirvana fallacy was given its name by Harold Demsetz in 1969[1][2], who said:[3]
| “ | The view that now pervades much public policy economics implicitly presents the relevant choice as between an ideal norm and an existing 'imperfect' institutional arrangement. This nirvana approach differs considerably from a comparative institution approach in which the relevant choice is between alternative real institutional arrangements. | ” |
A related quotation from Voltaire is:
- Le mieux est l'ennemi du bien.
often translated as
- The perfect is the enemy of the good.
though literally
- The best is the enemy of the good.
from "La Bégueule" (1772).
[edit] See also
[edit] Buddhist interpretations
- Dukkha, on Buddhist notion of disquiet at unsatisfactory life
- Wabi-sabi, a Japanese aesthetic of imperfection
[edit] References
- ^ Leeson, Peter T. (2007-08-06). "Anarchy unbound, or: why self-governance works better than you think". Cato Unbound. Cato Institute. http://www.cato-unbound.org/2007/08/06/peter-t-leeson/anarchy-unbound-or-why-self-governance-works-better-than-you-think/. Retrieved 2009-07-01.
- ^ Shapiro, Daniel (2007). Is the welfare state justified?. New York: Cambridge University Press. pp. 4. ISBN 0521860652. http://books.google.com/books?id=ei-1kg2TSwEC&pg=RA1-PA4&lpg=RA1-PA4&dq=nirvana+fallacy&source=web&ots=7XRACSkR89&sig=BDMSMcifXTESsKACbgII1unCPqg#PRA1-PA4,M1.
- ^ H. Demsetz, "Information and Efficiency: Another Viewpoint," Journal of Law and Economics 12 (April 1969): 1, quoted in Kirzner, Israel M. (1978). Competition and Entrepreneurship. p. 231. ISBN 0226437760.
 |
This philosophy-related article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. |
