Sign up to save your podcasts
Or
Share 365DaysOfPhilosophy 49 - Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc
Share to email
Share to Facebook
Share to X
Share to email
Share to Facebook
Share to X
Or
365DaysOfPhilosophy 49 - Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc
It’s a challenging one to say correctly (I have been guilty of referring to it as “ad hoc” when first learning philosophy!) but if you think of this as theinformal fallacy that claims that correlation proves causation, you shouldn’t have too much trouble knowing what it means.
When it comes to spotting post hoc, you look for an argument where someone relates something happening as the reason for something else happening.
The roster crows — the sun rises — therefore the rooster makes the sun rise.
I wore this lucky charm — I then won my match — therefore, wearing this lucky charm causes me to win the match.
In cases like these, you have to consider if there are alternative reasons as to ‘why X happened after Y, and is it entirely possible that the two happened but are not related’.
The rooster may crow in the morning because he likes to, and maybe he crows during other parts of the day and night too. The lucky charm may just be a coincidence, and maybe your skill at the game and confidence about your chances are more significant factors when it comes to winning.
I’ll be doing an overview of fallacy exercises tomorrow, but here’s a few resources (including a famous one from The West Wing — “after, therefore, because of it!”) to help revise post hoc ergo propter hoc.
View all episodes
It’s a challenging one to say correctly (I have been guilty of referring to it as “ad hoc” when first learning philosophy!) but if you think of this as theinformal fallacy that claims that correlation proves causation, you shouldn’t have too much trouble knowing what it means.
When it comes to spotting post hoc, you look for an argument where someone relates something happening as the reason for something else happening.
The roster crows — the sun rises — therefore the rooster makes the sun rise.
I wore this lucky charm — I then won my match — therefore, wearing this lucky charm causes me to win the match.
In cases like these, you have to consider if there are alternative reasons as to ‘why X happened after Y, and is it entirely possible that the two happened but are not related’.
The rooster may crow in the morning because he likes to, and maybe he crows during other parts of the day and night too. The lucky charm may just be a coincidence, and maybe your skill at the game and confidence about your chances are more significant factors when it comes to winning.
I’ll be doing an overview of fallacy exercises tomorrow, but here’s a few resources (including a famous one from The West Wing — “after, therefore, because of it!”) to help revise post hoc ergo propter hoc.