Statement #89 Discussion
0 comments All Discussions | Below is the statement as it appears with the fallacy marked as correct. You can see the totals of most frequent responses to this statement. And after reading the any discussion going on below, you can select your choice(s) for the correct answer. For now, whoever posts each statement can update corrections. |


Post Hoc
Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc AKA False Cause, Questionable Cause, Confusing Coincidental Relationships With Causes Category: Fallacies of Presumption → Casual Fallacies A Post Hoc is a fallacy with the following form:
It is evident in many cases that the mere fact that A occurs before B in no way indicates a causal relationship. For example, suppose Jill, who is in London, sneezed at the exact same time an earthquake started in California. It would clearly be irrational to arrest Jill for starting a natural disaster, since there is no reason to suspect any causal connection between the two events. While such cases are quite obvious, the Post Hoc fallacy is fairly common because there are cases in which there might be some connection between the events. For example, a person who has her computer crash after she installs a new piece of software would probably suspect that the software was to blame. If she simply concluded that the software caused the crash because it was installed before the crash she would be committing the Post Hoc fallacy. In such cases the fallacy would be committed because the evidence provided fails to justify acceptance of the causal claim. It is even theoretically possible for the fallacy to be committed when A really does cause B, provided that the "evidence" given consists only of the claim that A occurred before B. The key to the Post Hoc fallacy is not that there is no causal connection between A and B. It is that adequate evidence has not been provided for a claim that A causes B. Thus, Post Hoc resembles a Hasty Generalization in that it involves making a leap to an unwarranted conclusion. In the case of the Post Hoc fallacy, that leap is to a causal claim instead of a general proposition. Not surprisingly, many superstitions are probably based on Post Hoc reasoning. For example, suppose a person buys a good luck charm, does well on his exam, and then concludes that the good luck charm caused him to do well. This person would have fallen victim to the Post Hoc fallacy. This is not to say that all "superstitions" have no basis at all. For example, some "folk cures" have actually been found to work. Post Hoc fallacies are typically committed because people are simply not careful enough when they reason. Leaping to a causal conclusion is always easier and faster than actually investigating the phenomenon. However, such leaps tend to land far from the truth of the matter. Because Post Hoc fallacies are committed by drawing an unjustified causal conclusion, the key to avoiding them is careful investigation. While it is true that causes precede effects (outside of Star Trek, anyway), it is not true that precedence makes something a cause of something else. Because of this, a causal investigation should begin with finding what occurs before the effect in question, but it should not end there. ![]() |
1,146 Total Answer Attempts 50%
568 Correctly Popped Fallacies
578 Incorrectly Un/Popped


Most Common Responses102 - Confusing Cause and Effect 48 - Hasty Generalization 32 - Ignoring a Common Cause 30 - Slippery Slope 28 - Appeal to the Consequences of a Belief 27 - Biased Generalization 26 - Circumstantial Ad Hominem 25 - Misleading Vividness 23 - Relativist Fallacy 23 - Burden of Proof 22 - Fallacy of Composition 22 - False Dilemma 22 - Guilt by Association 18 - Genetic Fallacy 14 - Red Herring 12 - Ad Hominem Tu Quoque 11 - Gambler's Fallacy 10 - Appeal to Fear 8 - Begging the Question 8 - Appeal to Belief 7 - Fallacy of Division 7 - Appeal to Novelty 7 - Poisoning the Well 7 - Appeal to Tradition 6 - Appeal to Common Practice 6 - Middle Ground 5 - Appeal to Spite 4 - Ad Hominem 4 - Appeal to Ridicule 4 - Special Pleading 2 - Appeal to Pity 2 - Appeal to Popularity 2 - Appeal to Authority 2 - Personal Attack 1 - Appeal to Flattery 1 - Appeal to Emotion |
+ |
Login - High Scores - About - Trivium - Links - Contact
Donate To DontFallacy.Me - Support Dr. Labossiere
* Fallacious statements are usually paired with a random image of a person who never spoke those words.
This free site is for educational purposes, studying intellectual dishonesty. The images are being used under fair use. Sunflower by robstephaustrali. Darth Sidious image owned by Lucasfilm Ltd..