"For the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men." (1 Cor. 1:25)
Coincidence or Cause?
Posted On: September 02nd, 2005 at 12:35 pm
If it's Friday, there must be a logical fallacy. Do Fridays cause fallacies, or do fallacies cause Fridays? Given the hurricane in the headlines and the inevitable speculations, we're going to talk about two fallacies dealing with cause, correlation, and coincidence: Non Causa Pro Causa (non-cause for a cause) and Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc (after this, therefore because of this). Don't you just love the sound of those Latin names? They're almost as much fun as those old names for the Sundays: Quasimodogeniti.
We love to explain "why" things happen. It's what drives science and history. Our minds love to connect the dots, often in strange, illogical ways. We naturally look for the causes of things - disease, depression, destruction, wars, hurricanes. A fallacy occurs when we confuse a coincidence for a cause.
Non Causa Pro Causa confuses a correlated event with the cause of the event. Just because one thing happens at the same time as another thing, doesn't mean that thing has anything to do with cause. For example:
"Fevers cause itchy red bumps. I had a fever, and immediately broke out in itchy red bumps." (There are fevers with no itchy red bumps, and itchy red bumps with not fevers. Actually, both are caused by the measles' virus.)
"Welfare increases poverty. Whenever we increase welfare, more people go on the welfare roles." (While the observation may be true, the conclusion about cause is not. More people go on welfare because more welfare is available.)
Superstitions are built on the non causa pro causa fallacy:
"I failed my logic test today because I wasn't wearing my luck charm bracelet." (You failed your logic test because you didn't study.)
So is moralism:
"Immorality causes hurricanes. The homosexual Southern Decadence Festival was scheduled for New Orleans the week after Hurricane Katrina hit." (Hurricane Katrina was caused by the movement of air over water, not bad morals. There are plenty of immoral events that don't have hurricanes.)
And political rhetoric:
"George Bush is personally responsible for the destruction of New Orleans. He has consistently refused to sign the Kyoto agreement on global warming." (Even if hurricanes are the result of global warming, the Kyoto agreement would not have changed the environment sufficiently to prevent Hurricane Katrina.)
And bogus medical claims:
"Magnets cure migraines. I strapped rare earth magnets to my head and my headache instantly went away." (OK. But you might want to run a few controlled variable experiments to test whether this is a coincidence or a cure. Ever hear of the "placebo effect"? And in the meantime, watch out for flying metallic objects!)
And religious behavior:
"Going to church must be good for your health. People who attend church regularly statistically live longer than people who don't." (Some church goers actually die pretty young; some church non-goers live almost as long as Methuselah. The fact is, church goers probably have better life habits that promote longer life. But the act of attending church does not cause long life. Good life habits along with long life genes are the cause of long life.)
"Singing in choir may be good for your health. People who sing in choir have lower blood pressure and less stress." (Actually seen in a newspaper article! The act of singing in a choir has nothing to do with blood pressure and stress. In fact, if the choir is bad, the opposite might happen. Controlled breathing might have something to do with it, as might the positive effect of music. But there is no necessary connection to choir singing. Singing in the shower might have the same effect, and we don't have to listen to you.)
Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc (after this, therefore, because of this) is another common fallacy of causation. It has to do with the timing of things. Because one thing came after another, we conclude that the first thing must have caused the second. It makes sense: I pushed the button, and the door bell rang, therefore pushing the button causes the door bell to ring. The rooster crowed every day before sunrise, therefore the rooster caused the sun to rise. Hmmmm.
The "one thing after the other" fallacy is tempting because an effect follows its cause. The trouble is, you may not be seeing the actual cause, but a coincidence, or two effects of a common cause, or you may be confusing cause with effect: Cancer causes smoking. Roosters cause the sun to rise.
Examples:
"Marijuana use leads to heroine abuse. Nearly all heroine addicts started with marijuana." (But there are marijuana users who never go beyond dope. And there are heroine addicts who never smoked pot. Another explanation is that the same cause for marijuana use also causes heroine abuse.)
"Prayer has healing powers. I prayed last night and this morning my cold was gone." (Lots of people with colds pray and their colds aren't gone the next day. Some people with colds don't pray, and their colds disappear anyway. Actually, believers pray for the cold to go away and thank God for the cold (Philippian 4:6). Go figure.)
"US lack of support for Israel is dangerous. A week after Israel's withdrawal from the Golan Heights, a hurricane hit a major US city." (Actually heard! US foreign policy, like bad morals, does not cause hurricanes. Hurricanes are caused by air moving over water.)
The way you flush out fallacies of cause is to show that the effect and the proposed cause do not have that relationship. Usually a counter example or two does the trick. Good, controlled variable research is designed to weed out false causes and coincidences.
Watch out especially for the "God caused this because..." argument. Short of a direct, clear, prophetic word from the Lord Himself, this would be mighty presumptuous. It is also an "argument from silence." when we are dealing with the "hidden God," whose ways are not our ways, the Ultimate Final Cause of all things remains completely hidden "in, with, and under" His creation, and is therefore not up for discussion or speculation.
Repentance, as always, is in order, but never as cause for an effect! God isn't into bargaining.
Edited on: September 23rd, 2005 5:52 pm
Comments:
Re: Coincidence or Cause?
Posted On: September 05th, 2005 at 10:38 am by Jim Leistico
apparently the Southern Decadence was not only not the cause of Katrina, it also was not stopped by it - based on the picture of the parade in this morning's Belleville News-Democrat
thank you for the commentary on this logical fallacy
Re: Coincidence or Cause?
Posted On: September 05th, 2005 at 5:22 pm by Kobra
If God in fact did send his wrath and fury upon NO because of its sin, it would seem logical to me to conclude that God is attempting to establish Moses as his Mediator. Yet, we know that this is absolutely NOT true. Christ is the alpha and omega of our theology, and Christ is defined by the mercy and grace He has shown us at the cross by receiving in Himself our sin. So, was the purpose of God to once and for all punish the immorality of the citizens of NO? No, the purpose of God was to reveal His goodness in the person of Christ who has born our sin on his back, and in his hands, and in his feet, and on his head. Our king wears a crown of glory made of thorns.