[rendaw]

Is there some reason this is all focused around yes/no questions or a single statement? Is it like a standard format that all topics can be reworded to?

I'm wondering if this could this be used for something like comparing alternatives to solve a problem. In that case I'd expect the root to be a description of the problem, then alternatives, then pros-cons for those alternatives.

I'd never heard of this at all before despite searching, so I imagine there's a lot I don't know.

[guerrilla]

You can organize any number of alternatives as binary choices.

[ajnin]

Sure but that forces you to group options in ways that don't always make sense discursively and push some alternatives down the tree, and we all know that arguments that are near the root get the most attention.

[rendaw]

I believe that, but doesn't that make it much harder to read? Or are the organizational benefits worth it?

Edit: and I also don't see a way to do multiple arguments like that in a single document, unless you mean as a soft linkage.

[chuckadams]

And in actually complex rhetoric, the discrete choices are typically phrased to benefit the one casting the argument as such. False Dilemma is still false even when it’s embedded in a larger tree.