- Mistakenly thinks there are two [options](/en/options) when there are not, and tries to choose one or the other.
- Not trying to find a third option.
- The quality of decision making is 7.7 times better when there are two choices versus three choices. see [Quantity of choices and quality of decision making](/en/Quantity%20of%20choices%20and%20quality%20of%20decision%20making).
- [opposition](/en/opposition) Mistaking what is not for opposition.
- He says, "A or B."
- Isn't there an option for "both?"
- What about the "combination" option?
- With regard to planning, "both" is often interpreted as "do both" and then cut down to "it's not cost-effective".
- It's "impossible to do both or neither", not exclusion.
- Lack of ingenuity in how they are combined.
- There are many ways to combine them.
- Example
- Value Passing or Reference Passing? Passing by reference? → Passing by reference by value
- Regression? Classification? →Solve classification problems by using regression to find the probability of entering a class.
- see [Is logistic regression regression or classification?](/en/Is%20logistic%20regression%20regression%20or%20classification%3F)
- By assuming that they are antithetical, the two options are mistakenly thought to be "[confrontation](/en/confrontation)"
- This often leads to conflicts, especially in multi-person organizations, with separate groups pushing each option.
- Visualizing and trying to resolve this is [Conflict Resolution Diagram](/en/Conflict%20Resolution%20Diagram).
Thinking Patterns to Resolve - Isn't there a third one?
This page is auto-translated from /nishio/誤った二者択一 using DeepL. If you looks something interesting but the auto-translated English is not good enough to understand it, feel free to let me know at @nishio_en. I'm very happy to spread my thought to non-Japanese readers.