6

The fallacy goes like this.

The drunkard drinks a bottle of tequila with ice on Monday and gets drunk. The drunkard drinks a bottle of vodka with ice on Tuesday and gets drunk. The drunkard drinks a bottle of whiskey with ice on Wednesday and gets drunk. He concludes that the ice got him drunk.

What is the name of this drunk's fallacy?

10
  • 4
    It's called inferring causality from correlation. Commented Mar 26 at 23:49
  • 5
    Correlation does not imply causation, Latin name cum hoc ergo propter hoc ('with this, therefore because of this').
    – Conifold
    Commented Mar 26 at 23:54
  • @Conifold It would be nice if you could expand on cum hoc ergo propter hoc and why it is a violation of syllogistic logic in a full answer. I promise to give you the green checkmark.
    – Fomalhaut
    Commented Mar 27 at 2:50
  • 1
    I don't believe this is a fallacy; rather it is a mere error. Commented Mar 27 at 10:41
  • 1
    @JD Not really. A fallacy is specifically an error of reasoning. There's no particular theory of mine here. If you assert my cat is a dog then you're not engaging in a fallacy, you're just wrong. Commented Jul 9 at 20:36

1 Answer 1

4

To give an official answer, it's the Causation vs. Correlation fallacy.

3
  • 1
    Thank you. Why is causation pitted against causality? Isn't causation an object and causality a subject?
    – Fomalhaut
    Commented Jul 9 at 19:14
  • 1
    Whoops, you got me there. I meant to type correlation instead of causality, thank you!
    – Aibaahl
    Commented Jul 9 at 19:15
  • 1
    You're welcome. :)
    – Fomalhaut
    Commented Jul 9 at 19:19

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .