The supporting argument's P3 therefore presents a false dilemma, since a refined action-based account avoids overbreadth without requiring the conjunctive intention-plus-action standard.

?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

Action-based account(in philosophy of action): A theory or explanation that defines something primarily by what people actually do, rather than by their thoughts or intentions alone.
Conjunctive intention-plus-action standard(in philosophy of action): A requirement that something must have BOTH a person's intention AND their action together—'conjunctive' means both conditions must be true at the same time.
False dilemma(as used in logic and argumentation): A logical mistake where you present only two choices when there are actually more options available, making an argument seem stronger than it really is.
Overbreadth(in legal and philosophical analysis): When a rule, definition, or theory is too broad and covers too many things it shouldn't—like a net so wide it catches fish you didn't mean to catch.

Based on where you are in your exploration