Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
A logical fallacy of the questionable cause variety, it is subtly different from the fallacy cum hoc ergo propter hoc ('with this, therefore because of this'), in which two events occur simultaneously or the chronological ordering is insignificant or unknown. Post hoc is a logical fallacy in which one event seems to be the cause of a later ...
One prominent example is the post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy — a Latin phrase meaning "after this, therefore because of this." This fallacy occurs when a temporal sequence is mistaken for a causal relationship, leading to the erroneous assumption that if one event follows another, the former must have caused the latter. [11]
This fallacy is also known by the Latin phrase cum hoc ergo propter hoc ('with this, therefore because of this'). This differs from the fallacy known as post hoc ergo propter hoc ("after this, therefore because of this"), in which an event following another is seen as a necessary consequence of the former event, and from conflation , the errant ...
All that is left is the assertion that the argument is true, and it is thus the proof by assertion fallacy. The Cherry-Picking fallacy can occur within the Anecdotal fallacy if an example is used but it is not representative of the average occurrence of such a thing. Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc is another fallacy that is often paired with anecdotes.
The flaw is failing to account for natural fluctuations. It is frequently a special kind of post hoc fallacy. Gambler's fallacy – the incorrect belief that separate, independent events can affect the likelihood of another random event. If a fair coin lands on heads 10 times in a row, the belief that it is "due to the number of times it had ...
An example of a language dependent fallacy is given as a debate as to who in humanity are learners: the wise or the ignorant. [18]: 3 A language-independent fallacy is, for example: "Coriscus is different from Socrates." "Socrates is a man." "Therefore, Coriscus is different from a man." [18]: 4
The regression (or regressive) fallacy is an informal fallacy. It assumes that something has returned to normal because of corrective actions taken while it was abnormal. This fails to account for natural fluctuations. It is frequently a special kind of the post hoc fallacy.
In statistics, hypotheses suggested by a given dataset, when tested with the same dataset that suggested them, are likely to be accepted even when they are not true.This is because circular reasoning (double dipping) would be involved: something seems true in the limited data set; therefore we hypothesize that it is true in general; therefore we wrongly test it on the same, limited data set ...