FactNinja FACT-NINJA
🇨🇿 Čeština 🇬🇧 English 🇸🇰 Slovenčina 🇵🇱 Polski 🇩🇪 Deutsch 🇪🇸 Español
Sign up
Logical Fallacies

Post hoc ergo propter hoc

Alternative names: post hoc fallacy, after this, therefore because of this, confusing correlation with causation, cum hoc ergo propter hoc

Definition

A logical fallacy that confuses succession with causation. From the fact that event B follows event A, the speaker automatically concludes that A caused B. Correlation is not the same as causation — to speak of a cause, we must rule out other possible explanations.

Example usage

"I ate a roll in the morning and then I had a headache — the roll caused my migraine!" Or: "After vaccination, the child got the flu — the vaccination weakened them." (In both cases, dozens of other factors could have played a role.)
Source
https://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post_hoc_ergo_propter_hoc

Related techniques

Logical Fallacies

Ad hominem

An attack on the person presenting the argument instead of a substantive response to the argument itself. The speaker criticizes the charact...

Also: argument to the person, personal attack, argumentum ad hominem

Logical Fallacies

Ad hominem

An attack on the person presenting the argument instead of a substantive response to the argument itself. The speaker criticizes the character, motives, education, or background of the opponent — but does not refute what was said. Even if the criticism of the person is true, it does not mean that their argument is incorrect.

Example usage
A: "This study shows that smoking is harmful to health." B: "What do you know about science, you're just a high school teacher and you've never done research." (An attack on education instead of the content of the study.)

Also: argument to the person, personal attack, argumentum ad hominem, personal attack, ad hominem attack

Full detail Source
Logical Fallacies

Appeal to Emotion

Using strong emotions (pity, anger, nostalgia, patriotism) instead of factual arguments. Emotions are not proof in themselves; an emotional...

Also: argumentum ad passiones, emotional blackmail, appeal to emotion

Logical Fallacies

Appeal to Emotion

Using strong emotions (pity, anger, nostalgia, patriotism) instead of factual arguments. Emotions are not proof in themselves; an emotional reaction to a situation does not make a claim about it true.

Example usage
"Think of the starving children — that's why you must support our bill for farmer subsidies."

Also: argumentum ad passiones, emotional blackmail, appeal to emotion

Full detail Source
Logical Fallacies

Appeal to Pity

An attempt to persuade someone by invoking pity instead of a factual argument. The speaker shifts the focus from the substance of the argume...

Also: argumentum ad misericordiam, appeal to pity, appeal to compassion

Logical Fallacies

Appeal to Pity

An attempt to persuade someone by invoking pity instead of a factual argument. The speaker shifts the focus from the substance of the argument to their difficult situation — whether real or exaggerated — to gain approval or to prevent criticism.

Example usage
Student: "Teacher, please don't give me a failing grade — you have a family, you surely understand how hard it is when I've been working all weekend." (Workload is unrelated to how the student handled the material.)

Also: argumentum ad misericordiam, appeal to pity, appeal to compassion

Full detail Source
Logical Fallacies

Appeal to Fear

An attempt to persuade someone by invoking anxiety, panic, or fear instead of factual arguments. Fear bypasses rational thinking and pushes...

Also: fear-mongering, argumentum ad metum, scaring

Logical Fallacies

Appeal to Fear

An attempt to persuade someone by invoking anxiety, panic, or fear instead of factual arguments. Fear bypasses rational thinking and pushes for quick decisions.

Example usage
"If you don't pass this law, our country will collapse and your children will live in poverty."

Also: fear-mongering, argumentum ad metum, scaring, scare tactics

Full detail Source
Logical Fallacies

Argument from Authority

A claim is considered true simply because it was made by someone famous or influential — regardless of whether they have actual expertise in...

Also: argumentum ad verecundiam, appeal to authority, appeal to unknown authority

Logical Fallacies

Argument from Authority

A claim is considered true simply because it was made by someone famous or influential — regardless of whether they have actual expertise in the area. Using a real expert in their field is acceptable, but the argument becomes fallacious when: (a) the expert speaks outside their field, (b) it involves anonymous 'scientists say...', (c) there is no consensus in the field.

Example usage
"A famous actor recommends this homeopathic treatment — if he says it, it must work." (The actor is not a doctor.) Or: "American scientists have proven..." (Who? What research?)

Also: argumentum ad verecundiam, appeal to authority, appeal to unknown authority, authority bias

Full detail Source
Back to list