History Main / PerfectSolutionFallacy

** The same fallacious argument is used against building a border wall. Since a wall won't keep out ALL illegal aliens, there shouldn't be one at all. Especially funny when coming from people living and working in walled off environments.

* Commonly used to impugn the reliability of [[TheWikiRule wikis]], usually Website/TheOtherWiki. The fact that there's no way to permanently protect every single page from all [[WikiVandal vandalism]] or absolutely confirm that every last sentence added in good faith is absolutely true over all scenarios, becomes an excuse to claim the wiki is always wrong. [[NewMediaAreEvil Imagine if people held print encyclopedias to this standard.]]

** Similarly, like any other system, there will be people trying to abuse it. Arguing that welfare is bad because of welfare fraud ignores the balance between making the system fraud-proof and making it accessible enough to people who genuinely need it.

* This comes up all the time in politics, usually in the form of refusing to support certain candidates or laws because they don't completely solve our problems. It's a major cause of WeAreStrugglingTogether, as factions push for their perfect solutions.

* In ''[[https://archiveofourown.org/works/48748090 Andros Vs. Marinette]]'', Marinette Dupain-Cheng goes full RonTheDeathEater and tries to steal [[Series/PowerRangersInSpace Andros']] Morpher (that ends up [[CurbStompBattle being a very bad idea]]) because she is fed up with going absolutely nowhere in dealing with Hawk Moth with the Miraculous Ladybug powers alone.

* As far as ''Fanfic/KnowledgeIsPower'' (and ''Literature/HarryPotter'' [[SturgeonsLaw badfic]] in general) is concerned, the fact that Dumbledore's plan to defeat Voldemort had some flaws makes him as evil as Voldemort himself.

* Some people claim that because no act is entirely selfless ([[GoodFeelsGood there's always some reward even if sacrifices are made]]), there's no point in being kind at all, and treating another well is just as bad as disregarding them. This ignores the benefit to the other person, and implies that just because their wellbeing isn't the ''only'' factor, it isn't a factor at all.

* Used in several episodes of ''Series/PennAndTellerBullshit''. When discussing the American Disabilities Act, P&T take a man and his iron lung for a walk through town, noting several ADA-compliant shops and facilities that cannot accommodate him. No matter what accommodations a business implements, they state, somebody will always be left out, so why should the government be allowed to set and enforce an arbitrary standard?

** Also common is ignoring the stated problem on the grounds that the questioner has in his or her ignorance already failed to follow a "perfect" approach or methodology and should never have come upon that question in the first place. In other words: "I won't give you the solution you're asking for, because the knowledge would clutter your mind. You should instead try to solve this problem, which will allow a more perfect solution." Especially annoying as while the odds are good responses of this type ''will'' satisfy the original questioner's needs and thus end the dialogue, there's bound to be somebody ''else'' who's already familiar with the issues, genuinely ''does'' need an answer to the question, and now has unhelpful nonanswers cluttering the search space.

* In ''LightNovel/CookingWithWildGame'', Zattsu Tsun argues that because the law is racist in a certain few situations that have ''nothing'' to do with what he's on trial for, he should [[NotHyperbole be allowed to get away with murder]]. His judges/fellow tribesmen, who suffered the same oppression Zattsu did and have been victimized by his sadism for generations, are not impressed.

->''"Perfection is the enemy of the good."''

* Some people actually argue, [[PoesLaw seemingly being serious]], that since it's impossible to make a completely fair and equal society (due to some people just naturally being bigger, faster, smarter, or otherwise more adept), we shouldn't even bother trying to make society more equitable, even though this make about a much sense as saying "we'll never be able to abolish murder completely, so we might as well not punish murderers at all."

* A curious combination of this and MovingTheGoalposts emerged during the COVID-19 pandemic. When the pandemic first hit big in the U.S., the prevailing wisdom was to "flatten the curve" - i.e., slow the rate of infection by shutting down schools, businesses, and other places where people congregate so that hospitals would not be overwhelmed by a flood of patients. Several months in, however, the discussions on whether to reopen all those shuttered places, [[ThinkOfTheChildren especially schools]], tended to focus around whether it was "safe" to do so, mainly in the context of completely eliminating the risk of infection vs. accepting a manageable risk to mitigate other sorts of harm (economic, social, developmental, etc.) that were exacerbated by keeping them closed.

* Commonly used to impugn the reliability of [[TheWikiRule wikis]], usually Wiki/TheOtherWiki. The fact that there's no way to permanently protect every single page from all [[WikiVandal vandalism]] or absolutely confirm that every last sentence added in good faith is absolutely true over all scenarios, becomes an excuse to claim the wiki is always wrong. [[NewMediaAreEvil Imagine if people held print encyclopedias to this standard.]]

* Commonly used to refute the reliability of [[TheWikiRule wikis]], usually Wiki/TheOtherWiki. The fact that there's no way to permanently protect every single page from all [[WikiVandal vandalism]] or absolutely confirm that every last sentence added in good faith is absolutely true over all scenarios, becomes an excuse to claim the wiki is always wrong. [[NewMediaAreEvil Imagine if people held print encyclopedias to this standard.]]

* Commonly used to refute the reliability of [[TheWikiRule wikis]], usually Wiki/TheOtherWiki. The fact that there's no way to permanently protect every single page from all [[WikiVandal vandalism]] or absolutely confirm that every last sentence added in good faith is absolutely true over all scenarios, becomes an excuse to claim the wiki is always wrong.

* From Neil Gaiman's ''ComicBook/TheSandman'':
-->"They are using reason as a tool. Reason. [[ScienceIsBad It is no more reliable a tool than instinct, myth, or dream. But it has the potential to be far more dangerous, for them.]]"

Since, outside of mathematics, a perfect solution to ''anything'' is unlikely in the extreme, this fallacy is usually combined with BeggingTheQuestion; a debater will assume a "perfect" solution is one which fits their argument and ideals, regardless of whether their opponent would view the result as perfect, or even desirable.

** BeggingTheQuestion applies here heavily: your opponent must ''agree'' that the state in question is concrete and achievable for you to be able to use this as a premise.

* People who attempt to scare people into abstaining from sex often use this fallacy, with the argument that since condoms don't prevent pregnancy and [=STDs=] ''100% of the time'', they are useless. The "perfect" solution of "abstinence" is also BeggingTheQuestion, since most people who want a method of preventing pregnancy and STD transmission want it because they ''intend to have sex''. It's rather like saying the best way to avoid straining muscles during a workout is to not exercise.

This will often incorporate "flaws" which are also flaws of the system that would remain if the solution were rejected. This is often the basis of an AppealToIgnorance; the claim then is that because we don't ''perfectly'' understand something, our theories about it are necessarily false, no matter how good the models they generate are.

* Used against the theory of evolution. Some claim that evolution cannot be correct, because it doesn't explain how life began. While technically right, no-one has claimed it does; finding out how life began is an entirely different scientific branch. It is also used with the fossil record, where when transitional fossils are demonstrated to exist, the creationist will demand the transitions between ''those'' transitions until a fossil is not found, which is then used as grounds to dismiss the entire fossil record. Sometimes followed by [[AppealToIgnorance God of the Gaps argument]], depending on what kind of person you're dealing with.

* Some people actually argue, [[PoesLaw seemingly being serious]], that since it's impossible to make a completely fair and equal society (due to some people just naturally being bigger, faster, smarter, or otherwise more adept),we shouldn't even bother trying to make society more equitable, even though this make about a much sense as saying "we'll never be able to abolish murder completely, so we might as well not punish murderers at all."