What logical fallacy is present in the slogans used in "Animal Farm"?

Expert Answers

An illustration of the letter 'A' in a speech bubbles

This is an example of a logical fallacy called an either-or fallacy. This flawed line of thinking takes a complicated situation and reduces it to only two choices—in this case, the three-day week or the full manger. The either-or fallacy is quite common in political and other ads. For example, political ads might tell voters that they need to vote for a candidate or they will pay higher taxes, ignoring the possibility that there are other possible outcomes if that particular candidate does not win. In Animal Farm, the animals ignore or do not consider the range of options between these two alternatives. Their phrasing of their choices also makes it seem like these two choices are totally mutually exclusive, though they may not be in reality. For example, Snowball could also work to increase their manger, and perhaps Napoleon could reduce their working hours. 

Approved by eNotes Editorial
An illustration of the letter 'A' in a speech bubbles

Throughout George Orwell's Animal Farm, the comrades fall prey to a number of logical fallacies. One example of this is during the election between Snowball and Napoleon. Here the animals succumb to the Either-Or fallacy, which is a type of half-truth.

Snowball wanted to build a windmill, so the motto for his faction was: "Vote for Snowball and the three-day week." He argued that building the windmill would mean the animals would not have to work as hard. He believed building the windmill would result in the animals only have to work three days a week, but the motto represented this belief as a truth. Therefore, it is a fallacy.

Likewise, Napoleon's slogan was: "Vote for Napoleon and the full manger." Napoleon believed (or at least claimed to believe) that building the windmill would cause the animals to neglect their work, causing them to not have enough food. The animals who backed him believed that voting for Napoleon would bring "full mangers,"  but they represented this belief as a truth.

Additionally, both factions engaged in the either-or fallacy. They claimed that either their candidate would win and good things would happen, or the other candidate would win and bad things would happen. They did not acknowledge the possibility of any other options.

See eNotes Ad-Free

Start your 48-hour free trial to get access to more than 30,000 additional guides and more than 350,000 Homework Help questions answered by our experts.

Get 48 Hours Free Access
Approved by eNotes Editorial