Dealing with a binary argument

These are the patterns I've been leveraging for years to suss out where people just wanted others to shut up. Because that is the real goal behind why they are seeking a binary answer: "We're doing this, shut up." How it happens is diverse, from frontal attacks to unquestioned assertions. Underneath the how, there's a binary data assumption – right/wrong, no-go/go, good/bad, etc. – that is the key to understanding what's going on. It's a logical trap.

We have to inoculate ourselves against the trap.

• Binary is rarely the true representation of data; most often it's a highly simplified no-go/go.
• The usual goal of binary assertion is to maintain the current status quo – whether it's to continue hyping AI, keep/expand legacy energy sources, accumulation of wealth in very few hands, dismantling of worker rights and everyday humanity supports...the list is extensive.
• Even if the current state is active (like building new infrastructure for oil energy), the no-go state is focused on whether there will be change. Think of the current answer as a perpetual motion machine. In order to make the perpetual answer stop, you have to apply significant energy. To make the perpetual answer faster/heightened, it just takes acceptance that their answer is the status quo, adding your tacit agreement. That's as simple as not caring, waiting for more definitive information, accepting lies. It doesn't take an active adherence; it just needs to avoid an active shift.
• The binary presenter will often dismiss the shift as unwarranted due to complexity. Pay attention to the hypocrisy: my answer is good enough because nuance counts; your answer is bad because we have to focus on the simple. But also listen for the willingness to hear, because there are people who might be willing to work on a real pathway forward on some of our intransigent problems. It can be subtle because we're in such a binary-focused framework right now.
• The trollish binary presenter will often 'fix it for you' (usually 'it' is your thinking). Thank them for thinking (not for their effort, they will leverage it as work-done that demands recompense in terms of you acceptance), assure them you can think for yourself. From there it can go in many directions, from talking to them if they really do seem open to discussion, to shutting them down and social shunning.

People are very creative problem solvers. New patterns will emerge if this bullet list spreads. There's no safe way to offload thinking and information literacy.

The more people who accept the responsibility for their own information literacy, who are willing to call disinformation "lies", and understand the difference between the shifting sands of increasing understanding (misinformation) and lies (disinformation), the faster we can heal as a society.