Question

...
do

causation in two unrelated events

I go to my primary doctor for an yearly exam ,I have no symptoms but he suspects an ear infection he first contemplates to admit me for 3 days to the hospital for evaluation and treatment but than decides to see me in 3 days for reevaluation.
A day after my doctor appointment I have car accident and 3 days latter I am reevaluated as scheduled and found not to have an ear infection at all.
I argue that if he admitted me for 3 days to the hospital I would not have the car accident which is a true fact.What will be the logical fallacies in blaming the doctor for not admitting me [now we know that admission will be without any real indication since i did not have the ear infection] and avoid the car accident?
asked on Sunday, Jan 17, 2016 11:03:43 AM by do

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
0

This is a prime example of the Historian’s Fallacy , judging a person's decision in the light of new information not available at the time.

On a side note, "true fact" is redundant :) "Fact" is good enough. If it is not true, it is not a fact.

answered on Monday, Jan 18, 2016 06:42:47 AM by Bo Bennett, PhD

Bo Bennett, PhD Suggested These Categories

Comments