search

Confusing an Explanation with an Excuse

Description: Treating an explanation of a fact as if it were a justification of the fact, a valid reason for the fact, or evidence for the fact.

Logical Form:

Person 1 wants claim X be justified.
Person 2 explains claim X in detail.
Therefore, claim X is justified / true.

Example #1:

Barto: If masks don’t work, how do you explain the almost perfect correlation between mask-wearing communities and lower transmission rates?
Tikki: All this means is that in communities where more people where masks, the virus is less-likely to spread. It is not proof that masks are the reason.

Explanation: Not only did Tikki not answer the question asked, she created an answer based on elucidation of what Barto had said. Tikki explained what a correlation is (i.e., not “proof”) but came no closer to explaining the reason for the correlation.
Example #2:

Virgil: How do you justify the claim that Bigfoot is the missing link between the great apes and humans?
Marshall: Well, a "missing link" is the intermediary species between the two in the evolutionary process.

Explanation: Marshall simply explained what a missing link is; he did not give a valid reason for why he believes that Bigfoot is the missing link.

Exception: If it is clear to both parties that no justification attempt is being made, but rather just stating a fact, then this fallacy is not being committed.

Tip: If you are unsure if someone is trying to make an excuse or simply stating a fact, ask them.  Don’t assume.

References:

This a logical fallacy frequently used on the Internet. No academic sources could be found.

Questions about this fallacy? Ask our community!

Master the "Rules of Reason" for Making and Evaluating Claims

Claims are constantly being made, many of which are confusing, ambiguous, too general to be of value, exaggerated, unfalsifiable, and suggest a dichotomy when no such dichotomy exists. Good critical thinking requires a thorough understanding of the claim before attempting to determine its veracity. Good communication requires the ability to make clear, precise, explicit claims, or “strong” claims. The rules of reason in this book provide the framework for obtaining this understanding and ability.

This book / online course is about the the eleven rules of reason for making and evaluating claims. Each covered in detail in the book. 

Take the Online Course