Understanding the Cause and Effect Fallacy: Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc
Introduction to the Post Hoc Fallacy
The post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy is a common reasoning error where one assumes that because two events occur sequence-wise, the former must be the cause of the latter. This fallacy is easy to recognize with a few examples and an understanding of the underlying statistics and logical reasoning principles. Here, we delve into what the post hoc fallacy is, why it is problematic, and provide real-world illustrations to help clarify this critical concept.
What is the Post Hoc Fallacy?
The post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy, also known as the false cause fallacy, is a logical reasoning error where a cause is attributed to a preceding event simply because it occurred before. The Latin phrase “post hoc ergo propter hoc” translates to “after this, therefore because of this,” and it reflects the flawed reasoning involved.
The Role of Regression to the Mean
Understanding why events that happen in sequence are not necessarily causally linked is crucial. For instance, if a student studies diligently and performs well on a test, it is natural to assume that studying caused the good performance. However, if the student performs poorly in subsequent tests without changing their study habits, we might assume that the poor performance is unrelated to their study habits, but rather due to other factors, such as fatigue or personal issues.
Master's Degrees and Box Office Revenue: A False Causal Relationship
One common example used to illustrate the post hoc fallacy is the correlation between the number of Master's degrees issued by universities each year and the total box office revenue generated in that same year. For instance, if we compile data and find a strong positive correlation, a hasty conclusion might be that obtaining Master's degrees directly causes increased box office revenue. However, the reality is that both the number of Master's degrees and box office revenue could be influenced by a third factor, such as the economy, global events, or cultural trends.
Attribution Error and the False Cause Fallacy
Apart from post hoc reasoning, the false cause fallacy can also manifest in other forms of attributed cause that do not accurately reflect the cause and effect relationship. The ldquo;arrow of causationrdquo; refers to the problem of assuming a causal link when none exists. The ldquo;attributive errorrdquo; occurs when we assume that two events occurring together are causally related when they are not. For example, if a person suffers from insomnia after watching a horror movie, it is easy to attribute the insomnia to the movie, but it might actually be due to stress, anxiety, or other factors.
Implications and Applications
Recognizing the post hoc fallacy is critical in everyday decision-making, business, and scientific research. In the realm of business, companies often attribute short-term performance gains to recent strategic changes, ignoring other variables that might have contributed to the success. In science, researchers must be cautious about inferring causality from mere correlation, which is a hallmark of the post hoc fallacy.
Solution: The Golden Rule of Attribution
The great master Atisha suggested a simple yet profound solution to purge the sub-optimal thinking mode of the post hoc fallacy: ldquo;Drive all blames into one.rdquo; This means that when you attribute a cause to something, take responsibility and look for the core issue rather than blaming external factors. This approach encourages critical thinking, nuanced understanding, and a more accurate assessment of causes and effects.
Conclusion
The post hoc fallacy, or false cause reasoning, is a fundamental pitfall in logical thinking. By understanding the mechanisms behind this fallacy and applying critical thinking, we can make better decisions, discern accurate causality, and avoid attributing causes that are not justified. Mistakes in attributing causes can lead to incorrect policies, ineffective strategies, and misdirected efforts. Therefore, recognizing and avoiding the post hoc fallacy is essential for both individuals and societies.