Beyond Either/Or
“You’re either with us or against us.”
“If you’re not part of the solution, you’re part of the problem.”
“There are two types of people in the world…”
These phrases feel powerful because they’re simple. They cut through ambiguity. They demand commitment.
They’re also almost always wrong.
The False Dichotomy
A false choice shows two options as if they’re the only ones - when there are actually more. Politicians love this trick. So do advertisers. And so does your brain when it’s feeling lazy.
Examples:
“You can either have a successful career or be a good parent.” Reality: Many people do both. It’s difficult, it requires trade-offs, but it’s not a binary choice. The framing assumes you must pick one, which conveniently closes off the harder question of how to balance competing priorities.
“Either this policy works perfectly or we should abandon it entirely.” Reality: No policy works perfectly. Most work partially. The real question is whether the benefits outweigh the costs-a question that requires actual analysis rather than slogan-thinking.
“You either trust someone completely or you can’t trust them at all.” Reality: Trust is a spectrum. You might trust someone with your career advice but not your car keys. You might trust their intentions but not their judgment. Complete trust and complete distrust are both rare and usually unwarranted.
Why We Think in Binaries
Two-option thinking is easy. Two buckets need less brain power than a scale with endless points. Your brain is lazy - it takes shortcuts whenever it can.
Binary thinking also feels decisive. “It’s complicated” doesn’t rally people. “Good versus evil” does. Try building a political movement around “well, there are trade-offs on both sides and reasonable people can disagree.” See how far that gets you.
And sometimes binaries are real. Light switches are on or off. You’re either pregnant or not. Some questions genuinely have yes/no answers.
The problem is applying binary thinking where it doesn’t fit-which is most of the time. Most of reality is spectrums, but our brains want to see switches.
The Spectrum Reality
Most things exist on spectrums, not in categories:
Good/Bad → Most actions have mixed consequences. A choice can be good for some people and bad for others, good in the short term and bad in the long term, good for one goal and bad for another. “Good” and “bad” are summaries, not facts.
True/False → Many claims are partially true. “Exercise is healthy” is mostly true, but you can over-exercise. Context matters. Dosage matters. “Partially true” is a more honest answer than most of us are comfortable giving.
Success/Failure → Most attempts partially succeed. You might not hit your goal but learn something valuable. You might hit your goal and realize it was the wrong goal. Pure success and pure failure are rarer than the stories we tell.
Right/Wrong → Many ethical questions involve competing legitimate values. Honesty versus kindness. Freedom versus safety. Individual rights versus collective welfare. These aren’t easy problems with obvious answers-they’re genuine tensions that reasonable people resolve differently.
How Binary Thinking Hurts You
It limits your options
When you see only two choices, you miss the third, fourth, and fifth options that might be better. You’ve boxed yourself in for no reason.
“Should I quit my job or stay miserable?”
That’s a false binary. Consider:
- Change something about your current job
- Start a side project while keeping your job
- Negotiate different responsibilities
- Change your relationship to the work without changing the work
- Find what’s actually making you miserable and address that specifically
The question wasn’t really “quit or stay.” The question was “how do I stop being miserable?"-and there are many more than two answers.
It creates unnecessary conflict
When every disagreement becomes all-or-nothing, compromise becomes impossible. Working together becomes impossible.
“You either agree with me completely or you’re my enemy.”
This turns potential allies into opponents. Someone can disagree with you on one thing while agreeing on ten others. Binary thinking says they’re an enemy. Strategic thinking says they’re a 90% ally.
It oversimplifies people
Humans are complicated. The same person can be:
- Generally kind but occasionally cruel
- Smart about some things and clueless about others
- Right about this issue and wrong about that one
- Good for some purposes and bad for others
Reducing people to single labels (“good person” / “bad person”) blinds you to this complexity. It also blinds you to the complexity in yourself-you’re not purely good or purely bad either, though you probably tell yourself you’re the hero of your own story.
It prevents nuanced understanding
Complex problems require nuanced solutions. If you can only think in binaries, you’ll keep applying simple solutions to complex problems-and wondering why they don’t work, and blaming someone for the failure.
Breaking Out of Binary Thinking
Ask “What else?”
When you notice yourself facing two options, ask: “What are at least three other possibilities?”
Force yourself to generate alternatives. They might not all be good options-that’s fine. The exercise breaks the binary frame and reveals that you had more choices than you initially saw.
Replace “or” with “and”
“I can be successful OR happy” → “How might I be successful AND happy?” “We can have growth OR sustainability” → “How might we have growth AND sustainability?”
Sometimes both really are impossible. But often, the “or” is assumed rather than proven. You’ve accepted a trade-off that might not actually exist.
Use percentages
Instead of “I believe X” or “I don’t believe X,” try:
- “I’m 80% confident that X”
- “I’m 30% sure this will work”
This forces you to admit when you’re not sure. It also makes you more accurate over time - you can check if your 80% guesses really do come true about 80% of the time.
Look for the dial, not the switch
Ask: “What’s the spectrum here? Where am I on it? Where might I want to be?”
Instead of “productive or unproductive,” think about degrees of productivity and what influences them. Instead of “in shape or out of shape,” think about where you are on the fitness spectrum and what direction you’re moving.
Steelman the opposition
Before dismissing a view you disagree with, state it in its strongest form. Find what’s partially right about it.
This isn’t about being wishy-washy or giving up what you think. You can still disagree strongly. But seeing what’s partly right in other views gives you a clearer picture of reality - and makes you better at changing minds, if that’s your goal.
When Binaries Are Appropriate
Binary thinking isn’t always wrong. Some situations genuinely are black and white:
- Clear ethical violations: Some things are just wrong. You don’t need to find the spectrum on genocide. Not everything requires nuance.
- Literal binary choices: If you can only pick A or B-the job offer expires tomorrow, the ballot has two candidates-then binary thinking fits the situation.
- Decision deadlines: Sometimes you need to decide, and continued analysis becomes paralysis. At some point you pick and move forward.
The skill is knowing when binary thinking fits and when it doesn’t-and defaulting to nuance rather than defaulting to binaries. Most of us have the opposite default.
The Political Trap
Politics is where binary thinking does the most damage.
You’re expected to pick a side. Every issue becomes a team sport. Agreement with your side on one issue implies agreement on all issues. Disagreement makes you a traitor. Nuance makes you suspicious.
Reality: Most people hold a mix of views that don’t fit neatly into any political package. Most policies have trade-offs that reasonable people weigh differently based on different values and different predictions about consequences. Most political opponents aren’t evil-they’re prioritizing different values or working from different assumptions about how the world works.
You can acknowledge this while still having strong opinions. Nuance isn’t the same as indecision. Understanding why someone disagrees with you isn’t the same as agreeing with them.
Practical Exercise
Pick a belief you hold strongly. Now complete these sentences:
- “The best argument against my position is…”
- “Someone could reasonably hold the opposite view if they…”
- “My position might be wrong if…”
- “The part of the opposing view that’s actually valid is…”
If you can’t complete these sentences-if you can’t even imagine what someone with the opposite view might be thinking-your position might be more tribal than rational. You haven’t understood it; you’ve just picked a team.
What’s Next
Part 3 covers emotional decision-making-recognizing when anger, fear, or excitement are driving your choices instead of reason. Emotions aren’t the enemy, but they need to be understood and accounted for.
Enjoyed This?
If this helped something click, subscribe to my YouTube channel. More content like this, same approach - making things stick without insulting your intelligence. It’s free, it helps more people find this stuff, and it tells me what’s worth making more of.