Post hoc ergo propter hoc (Latin: 'after this, therefore because of this') is an informal fallacy that states: "Since event Y followed event X, event Y must have been caused by event X." It is often shortened simply to post hoc fallacy.
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 particularly tempting error because correlation appears to suggest causality. The fallacy lies in a conclusion based solely on the order of events, rather than taking into account other factors potentially responsible for the result that might rule out the connection.
A simple example is "the rooster crows immediately before sunrise; therefore the rooster causes the sun to rise."
Pattern
The form of the post hoc fallacy is expressed as follows:
- A occurred, then B occurred.
- Therefore, A caused B.
When B is undesirable, this pattern is often combined with the formal fallacy of denying the antecedent, assuming the logical inverse holds: Avoiding A will prevent B.
Examples
- A tenant moves into an apartment and the building's furnace develops a fault. The manager blames the tenant's arrival for the malfunction. One event merely followed the other, in the absence of causality.[1]
- The Brazilian footballer Pelé is said to have blamed a dip in his playing performance on having given a fan a specific playing shirt; after getting the shirt back his performance recovered. The loss of the shirt was given as the reason for his dip, and its return the cause of his recovery. However, it was later discovered the shirt returned was not the original shirt.[2]
- Vaccine hesitancy, where people see others diagnosed with illnesses shortly after receiving vaccinations, and assume that the vaccination caused the illness.[3]
See also
- Apophenia – Tendency to perceive connections between unrelated things
- Affirming the consequent – type of fallacious argument (logical fallacy)
- Association fallacy
- Cargo cult – adherents practice rituals which they believe will cause a more technologically advanced society to deliver goods.
- Coincidence
- Confirmation bias – Tendency of people to favor information that confirms their beliefs or values
- Correlation does not imply causation – Refutation of a logical fallacy
- Jumping to conclusions
- Magical thinking – Belief that unrelated events are causally connected despite the absence of any plausible causal link between them
- Superstition – Belief or behavior that is considered irrational or supernatural
- Surrogate endpoint
References
- ^ Damer, T Edward (1995). Attacking Faulty Reasoning: A Practical Guide to Fallacy-Free Arguments (3rd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing. p. 131. ISBN 978-0-534-21750-1. OCLC 30319422.
- ^ Macaskill, Sandy (2009-02-25). "Top 10: Football superstitions to rival Arsenal's Kolo Toure". The Telegraph. Archived from the original on 2010-08-26.
- ^ Manktelow, K. I. (2012). Thinking and Reasoning: An Introduction to the Psychology of Reason, Judgment and Decision Making. Psychology Press. p. 119. ISBN 9781841697413.