• Choose a category
• All
• Classic-Fiction

b. Post hoc, ergo proctor hoc. This term is the Latin for after this, therefore because of this. The fallacy rests in assuming that because A precedes B in time, A causes B. For example, it was once thought that the sun shining on a pile of garbage caused the garbage to conceive flies.

This error is the stuff that superstition is made of. “I walked under a ladder, and then I got hit by a car” becomes “Because I walked under a ladder, I got hit by a car.” A more dangerous form of this error goes like this:

Evidence: A new neighbor moved in downstairs on Saturday. My television disappeared on Sunday.

Conclusion: The new neighbor stole my TV.

As this example also illustrates, typically in false cause some significant alternative has not been considered, such as the presence of flies’ eggs in the garbage. Similarly, it does not follow that if a person watches television and then commits a crime, television watching necessarily causes crime; there are other causes to be considered.

c. Mistaking correlation for cause. This fallacy occurs when a person assumes that a correlation between two things—some kind of connection—is necessarily causal. Philosopher David Hume called this problem “the constant conjunction of observed events.” If you speed in a car and then have a minor accident, it does not follow that speeding caused the accident. If an exit poll reveals that a large number of voters under the age of 25 voted for candidate X, and X loses, it does not follow that X lost because he failed to appeal to older voters. There is a correlation, but the candidate may have lost for a number of reasons.

7. False dilemma. When the options are reduced to only two often sharply opposed alternatives, you have committed a false dilemma. An obvious example appears in the case often made for Intelligent Design: because the universe is very complexly organized, it had to have been created by an intelligent life force. Are there no alternative explanations?

8. Hasty generalization. A conclusion derived from only one or two examples produces the fallacy known as hasty generalization. It is also known as an unwarranted inductive leap because the conclusion lacks sufficient evidence. When a child concludes that all orange food tastes bad because he dislikes carrots, he has run afoul of this fallacy. Give him an orange popsicle.

9. Non sequitur. Latin for “it does not follow,” non sequiturs skip logical steps in arriving at a conclusion. For example: “If we mandate a new tax on people who work downtown but do not live there, businesses will all leave the city.” Really?

10. Oversimplification/overgeneralization is an inadequately qualified claim. It may be true that some heavy drinkers are alcoholics, but it would not be fair to claim that all heavy drinking is or leads to alcoholism. As a rule, be wary of “totalizing” or global pronouncements; the bigger the generalization, the more likely it will admit of exceptions.

11. Poisoning the well. This fallacy occurs when a person uses loaded language to trivialize or dismiss an argument before even mentioning it. For example: “No reasonable person would swallow that left-wing, tax-and-spend position.”

12. Red herring. The name comes from the practice of using herring, a smelly fish, to distract dogs from the scent they are supposed to be tracking. A red herring diverts the attention of the audience from the matter at hand, often by provoking them with some loaded or controversial topic not really related to the matter at hand. For example, if you are talking about the quality of different kinds of computers, the issue of whether or not they were made in America would be a red herring.

13. Slippery slope. This error is based on the fear that once a move is made in one direction, we will necessarily continue to “slide” in that direction. So, for example, if the U.S. approves medicinal uses of marijuana, soon there will be no control of what is now illicit drug use across