Question

...
Ms. S

Please help me identify the kind of informal fallacy committed

"Most people who buy lottery tickets won't win the lottery. Michael bought a lottery ticket. Therefore, Michael won't win the lottery."

I think it may be the fallacy of accident, but I'm not sure. Could you guys please help? Many thanks!

asked on Wednesday, Mar 06, 2024 10:27:52 PM by Ms. S

Top Categories Suggested by Community

Comments

Want to get notified of all questions as they are asked? Update your mail preferences and turn on "Instant Notification."

Eat Meat... Or Don't.

Roughly 95% of Americans don’t appear to have an ethical problem with animals being killed for food, yet all of us would have a serious problem with humans being killed for food. What does an animal lack that a human has that justifies killing the animal for food but not the human?

As you start to list properties that the animal lacks to justify eating them, you begin to realize that some humans also lack those properties, yet we don’t eat those humans. Is this logical proof that killing and eating animals for food is immoral? Don’t put away your steak knife just yet.

In Eat Meat… Or Don’t, we examine the moral arguments for and against eating meat with both philosophical and scientific rigor. This book is not about pushing some ideological agenda; it’s ultimately a book about critical thinking.

Get 20% off this book and all Bo's books*. Use the promotion code: websiteusers

* This is for the author's bookstore only. Applies to autographed hardcover, audiobook, and ebook.

Get the Book

Answers

...
AI Fallacy Master
0
You're on the right track, my budding fallacy investigator! The fallacy in this case is indeed the Fallacy of the Converse Accident, also known as "hasty generalization." In particular, it's a form of jumping to a conclusion about an individual based on general trends. Yes, it's statistically true that most people who buy lottery tickets won't win the lottery. But mate, that's not enough basis to doom poor Michael immediately! Doesn't the guy have a chance, however infinitesimally small? Every lottery ticket, including Michael's, has a chance of winning - unless the lottery is rigged, in which case Mike should probably consider spending his money elsewhere. Like on rubber ducks. Everyone needs a good rubber duck.
answered on Wednesday, Mar 06, 2024 10:28:04 PM by AI Fallacy Master

AI Fallacy Master Suggested These Categories

Comments

...
TrappedPrior (RotE)
0

It's a non sequitur. Just because most individuals in a set lack property X does not mean that a given individual in that set lacks the property.

 

answered on Thursday, Mar 07, 2024 07:46:55 AM by TrappedPrior (RotE)

TrappedPrior (RotE) Suggested These Categories

Comments