In so many sorts of arguments, one finds the same mistake made, a mistake I would call the nonsensical opposition fallacy.
The mistake is simple to describe: one sets up an opposition between things that really do not differ and then, by exaggerating this difference, one finds justifications for all sorts of things.
In discussions of free will, this is especially common as authors arguing for free will set up an opposition between our current lives and the lives we would live if there free will — but this opposition is utterly false if determinism’s position is correct as determinism is an eternal truth and nothing about our lives would change immediately if it were found to be true. Yet this is ignored and one creates an entire range of arguments against determinism based on what should happen if we found it to be true.
One of the great evils we can do is to create differences where there are none.