The Fallacy of the False Cause

Ginny was getting pretty steamed. "We tried code inspections back in Release 5, and you know what happened then. Everything slowed down, we got nothing done, everyone got into fights, and Morgan left the group. If we have to do inspections, you can count me out." Ginny's argument, in essence, was that since some unpleasant events happened shortly after inspections began, the code inspections caused them.

Arguments based on the
Fallacy of the False Cause
lead organizations
to make costly errorsAlthough her argument is convincing to many, it doesn't prove her case. It's an example of a rhetorical fallacy called post hoc ergo propter hoc — Latin for "after this, therefore because of this." Ginny argues that since the unpleasant events followed the adoption of code inspections, the code inspections caused the problems, and therefore all code inspections, of any kind whatever, are bad.

A more convincing argument would exclude other possible causes. For example, were the inspections run badly? Were people inadequately trained? Were inspections introduced when people were too busy to learn how to do inspections?

The Post Hoc fallacy is a special case of a more general type of fallacy — the fallacy of the false cause. In Post Hoc, the apparent causal connection relates to the timing of the two events. But connections can also be unrelated to timing:

All of the projects Gerhard has managed in the past few years have been late and over budget. Since people now believe that Gerhard was the cause of the overruns, he can no longer get assignments as a project lead. Nobody seems to remember that each of Gerhard's project sponsors had either reduced his budget or expanded requirements so many times that no project manager would have had much of a chance to perform well.

Gerhard's management skill was the most obvious factor common to the failed projects, but it wasn't the cause. In this case, faulty reasoning damages a career and deprives the company of a skilled manager.

How can you spot this kind of error in the heat of debate? The fallacy of the false cause might be lurking if the argument states that:

Since A was present when B occurred, then A was the cause. Or Since A preceded B, A caused B.

To respond to arguments that use this fallacy, use examples in which A was present, but B wasn't. Your debate partner might not be convinced, but it's your best shot.

Educate your colleagues about the Fallacy of the False Cause. When we understand how much it can cost, and when we understand how to avoid it, we can save much pain and frustration. Perhaps Will Rogers said it best (though the thought has been attributed to many others as well):

It's not what we don't know that hurts; it's what we know that ain't so.

 Top    Next Issue

The article you've been reading is an archived issue of Point Lookout, my weekly newsletter. I've been publishing it since January, 2001, free to all subscribers, over the Web, and via RSS. You can help keep it free by donating either as an individual or as an organization. You'll receive in return my sincere thanks — and the comfort of knowing that you've helped to propagate insights and perspectives that can help make our workplaces a little more human-friendly. More

Your comments are welcome

Would you like to see your comments posted here? rbrenhxYNxRmunqbgKOcCner@ChacSiAaVAMJZGPXpqFZoCanyon.comSend me your comments by email, or by Web form.

About Point Lookout

Thank you for reading this article. I hope you enjoyed it and found it useful, and that you'll consider recommending it to a friend.

Point Lookout is a free weekly email newsletter. Browse the archive of past issues. Subscribe for free.

Support Point Lookout by joining the Friends of Point Lookout, as an individual or as an organization.

Do you face a complex interpersonal situation? Send it in, anonymously if you like, and I'll give you my two cents.

Related articles

More articles on Emotions at Work:

Can You Hear Me Now?

Not feeling heard can feel like an attack, even when there was no attack, and then conversation can quickly turn to war. Here are some tips for hearing your conversation partner and for conveying the message that you actually did hear.

On Virtual Relationships

Whether or not you work as part of a virtual team, you probably work with some people you rarely meet face-to-face. And there are some people you've never met, and probably never will. What does it take to maintain good working relationships with people you rarely meet?

Fill in the Blanks

When we conceal information about ourselves and our areas of responsibility, we make room for others to speculate. Speculation is rarely helpful. It's wise to fill in the blanks.

Fooling Ourselves

Humans have impressive abilities to convince themselves of things that are false. One explanation for this behavior is the theory of cognitive dissonance.

Why Scope Expands: II

The scope of an effort underway tends to expand over time. Why do scopes not contract just as often? One cause might be cognitive biases that make us more receptive to expansion than contraction.

See also Emotions at Work, Critical Thinking at Work and Rhetorical Fallacies for more related articles.

Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout

Coming October 17: Overt Belligerence in Meetings

Some meetings lose their way in vain attempts to mollify a belligerent participant who simply will not be mollified. Here's one scenario that fits this pattern. Available here and by RSS on October 17.

And on October 24: Conversation Irritants: I

Conversations at work can be frustrating even when everyone tries to be polite, clear, and unambiguous. But some people actually try to be nasty, unclear, and ambiguous. Here's Part I of a small collection of their techniques. Available here and by RSS on October 24.

Coaching services

I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenknAFPLVaocQwHzYyner@ChacLXAnWyztlIcxQWzwoCanyon.com or (650) 787-6475, or toll-free in the continental US at (866) 378-5470.

Get the ebook!

Past issues of Point Lookout are available in six ebooks:

• Get 2001-2 in Geese Don't Land on Twigs (PDF, USD 11.95)
• Get 2003-4 in Why Dogs Wag (PDF, USD 11.95)
• Get 2005-6 in Loopy Things We Do (PDF, USD 11.95)
• Get 2007-8 in Things We Believe That Maybe Aren't So True (PDF, USD 11.95)
• Get 2009-10 in The Questions Not Asked (PDF, USD 11.95)
• Get all of the first twelve years (2001-2012) in The Collected Issues of Point Lookout (PDF, USD 28.99)

Are you a writer, editor or publisher on deadline? Are you looking for an article that will get people talking and get compliments flying your way? You can have 500 words in your inbox in one hour. License any article from this Web site. More info

Public seminars

The Power Affect: How We Express Our Personal Power

Many people who possess real organizational power have a characteristic demeanor. It's the way they project their presence. I call this the power affect. Some people — call them power pretenders — adopt the power affect well before they attain significant organizational power. Unfortunately for their colleagues, and for their organizations, power pretenders can attain organizational power out of proportion to their merit or abilities. Understanding the power affect is therefore important for anyone who aims to attain power, or anyone who works with power pretenders. Read more about this program.

• A recording of a program presented 6:00 PM June 29 (Eastern Time), Monthly Webinar, Technobility Webinar Series. You can earn 1.0 Category 'A' PDU by viewing this program. View this program now.