Knots in the Neurons

This is an update on my reading. In my ignorance, I raised a question: "There are so many ways of getting it wrong, there must be lots of ways  of getting it right. Or is that an improper premise?" 

Watch as I untie the knots in my neurons. Now that I have done some reading, I understand that this idea is a combination of non-sequitur fallacy and equivocation fallacy.

Non sequitur: "there must be lots of ways of getting it right" does not follow from " there are many ways of getting it wrong". Perhaps the only way of getting it right is to not get it wrong. Or there may be more than one practical solution to a problem. Or it could be that there is no way of getting it right, as in apophatic theology. 

Equivocation: The adjective right is used in different contexts. Conflating factual rightness with ethical rightness or logical rightness or pragmatic rightness is an equivocation fallacy. Being right in one sense does not imply being right in another. 

So whether there is one way of getting it right or many or none depends on what you are talking about. One more knot in the neurons.