search

Become an active member of our fallacy-discussing community (or just become a lurker!)

Hypothesis Contrary to Fact

(also known as: counterfactual fallacy, speculative fallacy, "what if" fallacy, wouldchuck)

Description: Offering a poorly supported claim about what might have happened in the past or future, if (the hypothetical part) circumstances or conditions were different.  The fallacy also entails treating future hypothetical situations as if they are fact.

Logical Form:

If event X did happen, then event Y would have happened (based only on speculation).

Example #1:

If you took that course on CD player repair right out of high school, you would be doing well and gainfully employed right now.

Explanation: This is speculation at best, not founded on evidence, and is unfalsifiable.  There are many people with far more useful talents who are unemployed, and many who are “gainfully” employed who are not doing well at all. Besides, perhaps those with certificates in compact disc repair are gainfully employed... at McDonald’s.

Example #2:

John, if you would have taken a shower more often, you would still be dating Tina.

Explanation: Past hypotheticals that are stated as fact are most often nothing more than one possible outcome of many.  One cannot ignore probabilities when making these kinds of statements.  Perhaps Tina likes the smell of man sweat.  Perhaps Tina would have still preferred Renaldo over John despite John's personal hygiene because of Renaldo's enormous intellect.

Exception: In either/or situations, general predictions can obviously be made without fallacy:

If you didn’t flip heads on the coin, it would have been tails.

Fun Fact: Right out of college, with a degree in marketing, I worked at the Olive Garden (an Italian-like semi-fast food chain here in the States). Perhaps I should have opted for the CD repair right out of high school and saved $120,000. I am pretty sure the Olive Garden would have still hired me.

References:

Moore, W. E. (1967). Creative and Critical Thinking. Houghton Mifflin.

Questions about this fallacy? Ask our community!

Uncomfortable Ideas: Facts don't care about feelings. Science isn't concerned about sensibilities. And reality couldn't care less about rage.

This is a book about uncomfortable ideas—the reasons we avoid them, the reasons we shouldn’t, and discussion of dozens of examples that might infuriate you, offend you, or at least make you uncomfortable.

Many of our ideas about the world are based more on feelings than facts, sensibilities than science, and rage than reality. We gravitate toward ideas that make us feel comfortable in areas such as religion, politics, philosophy, social justice, love and sex, humanity, and morality. We avoid ideas that make us feel uncomfortable. This avoidance is a largely unconscious process that affects our judgment and gets in the way of our ability to reach rational and reasonable conclusions. By understanding how our mind works in this area, we can start embracing uncomfortable ideas and be better informed, be more understanding of others, and make better decisions in all areas of life.

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