1

Is this a Post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy? 'The most intense lightning storm ever recorded was followed by many numerous Bushfires; the lightning must have caused them.'

and why?

Thanks for any answers, im really struggling with this.

Improve this question
3
  • Correlation does not imply causation
    – Mauro ALLEGRANZA
    Commented Jan 22, 2021 at 11:44
  • Correct; also Post hoc ergo propter hoc will do.
    – Mauro ALLEGRANZA
    Commented Jan 22, 2021 at 11:45
  • The thing is, lightning storm are indeed known to cause bushfires, so as David Blomstrom says below, only the "must" is too much (and even then, "must" only denotes very high certainty, not 100%). Post hoc ergo propter hoc would more likely be something with no obvious causation link, like "I won the lottery right after dumping my girl friend, ergo she must have been giving me bad luck all this time".
    – armand
    Commented Jan 22, 2021 at 14:19

0

Reset to default

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .