Question

...
Daniel

Jellyfish vs. Shark fallacy?

Is there a term for this sort of reasoning:

Someone states that box jellyfish stings are almost always fatal. The only statement they make to support the claim is: “More people have died throughout history from box jellyfish stings than from shark attacks.”

That last statement is true: approx. 10 people/year die from shark bites while approx. 100/year die from box jellyfish stings. But thousands of people — perhaps tens- or hundreds of thousands — are stung every year, so it has little or no bearing on the initial claim.

Thanks!

asked on Monday, Jan 02, 2023 05:26:19 PM by Daniel

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."

Like the Site? You'll Love the Book!

This book is a crash course, meant to catapult you into a world where you start to see things how they really are, not how you think they are.  The focus of this book is on logical fallacies, which loosely defined, are simply errors in reasoning.  With the reading of each page, you can make significant improvements in the way you reason and make decisions.

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

...
Bo Bennett, PhD
3

Let's start by making this a clear argument with premises and a conclusion:

P1. More people have died throughout history from box jellyfish stings than from shark attacks.

C. Therefore, box jellyfish stings are almost always fatal. 

This is a clear non sequitur as we are missing information to make that conclusion. Perhaps we can also say that what the argument is suggesting is that:

P1. Shark attacks are almost always fatal (missing information - implied)
P2. Box jellyfish stings are more common then shark attacks.
C. Therefore, Box jellyfish stings are almost always fatal.

The form of this would be:
A's are B.
C's are D.
Therefore, C's are B.

This is a form of the fallacy of four terms . There is no logical connection between the terms because we introduced four of them into the syllogism (shark bite, jellyfish sting, fatal, common).

answered on Tuesday, Jan 03, 2023 07:34:10 AM by Bo Bennett, PhD

Bo Bennett, PhD Suggested These Categories

Comments

...
TrappedPrior (RotE)
3

I'm racking my brains - there should be a term for this - but I can't think of one.

I will say that:

P) More people throughout history have died from box jellyfish stings than shark attacks

C) Box jellyfish stings are almost always fatal

is a non sequitur. 

If one wishes to defend the claim that X is "almost always" (i.e. 90% of the time, or more frequently than that) the case, they need to do more than show that X is more frequent than Y. In fact, they ought not to compare X and Y at all. They need to look at the total set of cases, and then compare cases of X to those of not-X. In this example, one would need to look at all the times people were stung by box jellyfish, then look at the percentage of those people that died.

So the claim is fallacious; I just lack the appropriate term.

answered on Monday, Jan 02, 2023 07:09:31 PM by TrappedPrior (RotE)

TrappedPrior (RotE) Suggested These Categories

Comments