Causation Fallacy: Etymology, Literal and Conceptual Meanings
Etymology/Term
The term “causation fallacy” originates from the Latin word “causa,” meaning cause or reason. In logic and rhetoric, a fallacy refers to faulty reasoning that undermines the validity of an argument. The causation fallacy, also known as the fallacy of false cause or non causa pro causa, occurs when a cause-and-effect relationship is incorrectly assumed between two events without proper evidence or logical connection.
Literal and Conceptual Meanings:
- Literal Meaning:
- Misattribution: Incorrectly assigning causation between two events.
- Correlation vs. Causation: Mistaking correlation (a statistical association) for causation (a cause-and-effect relationship).
- Conceptual Meaning:
- Post Hoc Fallacy: Assuming that because one event follows another, the first caused the second.
- Cum Hoc Fallacy: Incorrectly associating two events occurring simultaneously as causally related.
- Ignored Third Variable: Overlooking other factors that may be influencing the observed relationship.
- Regression Fallacy: Assuming that a trend will continue in the same direction without considering natural fluctuations.
In essence, the causation fallacy underscores the importance of critically examining the evidence and reasoning behind claims of cause-and-effect relationships to avoid logical pitfalls and ensure accurate conclusions.
Causation Fallacy: Definition as a Rhetorical Device
The causation fallacy, as a rhetorical device, involves erroneously attributing a cause-and-effect relationship between two events without sufficient evidence or logical support. It often relies on the assumption that just because one event precedes another, it must be the cause, neglecting other potential factors. This fallacy misleads by oversimplifying complex relationships and can undermine the credibility of an argument or claim.
Causation Fallacy: Types and Examples
| Type of Causation Fallacy | Definition | Example |
| Post Hoc Fallacy (Post Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc) | Assuming that because one event follows another, the first caused the second. | Example: The rooster crows before sunrise; therefore, the rooster’s crowing causes the sun to rise. |
| Cum Hoc Fallacy (Correlation Implies Causation) | Incorrectly associating two events occurring simultaneously as causally related. | Example: Ice cream sales and drowning incidents both increase in the summer, so eating ice cream causes drowning. |
| Ignored Third Variable Fallacy | Overlooking other factors that may be influencing the observed relationship. | Example: A study finds a correlation between increased ice cream sales and sunburns, ignoring sun exposure as the third variable. |
| Regression Fallacy | Assuming that a trend will continue in the same direction without considering natural fluctuations. | Example: After a winning streak, assuming a sports team will always win without acknowledging variations in performance. |
Each type of causation fallacy demonstrates a different way in which the connection between cause and effect is inaccurately established, leading to flawed reasoning and potentially false conclusions.
Causation Fallacy: Examples in Everyday Life
- Post Hoc Fallacy:
- Situation: A student wears a lucky charm during exams and scores well.
- Causation Fallacy: Assuming the lucky charm caused the success without considering other factors like preparation.
- Cum Hoc Fallacy:
- Situation: People using umbrellas and an increase in car accidents are observed during a rainy day.
- Causation Fallacy: Incorrectly concluding that using umbrellas causes car accidents due to their simultaneous occurrence.
- Ignored Third Variable Fallacy:
- Situation: Research shows a link between increased ice cream sales and a rise in drowning incidents.
- Causation Fallacy: Failing to consider the third variable of warm weather, which contributes to both ice cream sales and swimming, leading to more drownings.
- Regression Fallacy:
- Situation: A basketball player scores exceptionally well in one game but performs below average in the following games.
- Causation Fallacy: Assuming the player will consistently perform exceptionally without considering the normal variations in performance.
- False Analogy:
- Situation: A successful CEO drops out of college, so dropping out of college is seen as the key to success.
- Causation Fallacy: Assuming that because one successful person dropped out of college, dropping out is the cause of success.
- Cherry Picking:
- Situation: Highlighting a few students who excelled without studying much and claiming that hard work is not necessary for academic success.
- Causation Fallacy: Cherry picking examples to support the claim that minimal effort leads to success.
- Misleading Graphs:
- Situation: Graphs show a correlation between the number of storks in an area and the birth rate.
- Fallacy: Incorrectly implying that more storks cause higher birth rates, neglecting the common factor of population density.
- Superstitions:
- Situation: A person wins a lottery after wearing a specific pair of socks.
- Fallacy: Believing that the socks caused the win without acknowledging chance.
- Political Campaigns:
- Situation: A candidate claims that crime rates increased during their opponent’s term, implying their policies caused the rise.
- Fallacy: Oversimplifying complex social factors contributing to crime and attributing it solely to the opponent’s policies.
- Homeopathic Remedies:
- Situation: Taking a homeopathic remedy and feeling better afterward.
- Fallacy: Assuming the remedy caused the improvement without considering the body’s natural healing processes or other factors.
Causation Fallacy in Literature: Suggested Readings
- Aristotle. On Rhetoric: A Theory of Civic Discourse. Translated by George A. Kennedy, Oxford UP, 2007.
- Booth, Wayne C., Gregory G. Colomb, and Joseph M. Williams. The Craft of Research. 4th ed., University of Chicago Press, 2016.
- Graff, Gerald, and Cathy Birkenstein. They Say/I Say: The Moves That Matter in Academic Writing. 3rd ed., W. W. Norton & Company, 2014.
- Heinrichs, Jay. Thank You for Arguing: What Aristotle, Lincoln, and Homer Simpson Can Teach Us About the Art of Persuasion. 3rd ed., Three Rivers Press, 2017.
- Lanham, Richard A. A Handlist of Rhetorical Terms. 2nd ed., University of California Press, 1991.
- Lunsford, Andrea A., John J. Ruszkiewicz, and Keith Walters. Everything’s an Argument with Readings. 8th ed., Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2019.
- Perelman, Chaim, and Lucie Olbrechts-Tyteca. The New Rhetoric: A Treatise on Argumentation. Translated by John Wilkinson and Purcell Weaver, University of Notre Dame Press, 1969.
- Strunk, William, and E. B. White. The Elements of Style. 4th ed., Pearson, 1999.
