comments

Regression fallacy

Regression fallacy – ascribes cause where none exists. The flaw is failing to account for natural fluctuations. It is frequently a special kind of the post hoc fallacy.

RELATED ARTICLESExplain
⌅
Fallacies
⌃
Informal fallacies
■
Regression fallacy
□
(Shifting the) Burden of proof
□
Argument from ignorance
□
Argument from repetition
□
Argument from silence
□
Argument to moderation
□
Argumentum verbosium
□
Begging the question
□
Circular cause and consequence
□
Continuum fallacy
□
Correlation does not imply causation
□
Correlative-based fallacies
□
Ecological fallacy
□
Equivocation
□
Etymological fallacy
□
Fallacy of composition
□
Fallacy of division
□
Fallacy of many questions
□
Fallacy of the single cause
□
False attribution
□
False dilemma
□
Gambler's fallacy
□
Historian's fallacy
□
Homunculus fallacy
□
If-by-whiskey
□
Ignoratio elenchi
□
Incomplete comparison
□
Inconsistent comparison
□
Intentional fallacy
□
Kettle logic
□
Ludic fallacy
□
Mind projection fallacy
□
Moving the goalposts
□
Nirvana fallacy
□
Onus probandi
□
Petitio principii
□
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
□
Proof by verbosity
□
Prosecutor's fallacy
□
Psychologist's fallacy
□
Red herring
□
Reification
□
Retrospective determinism
□
Self-contradiction
□
Special pleading
□
Straw man
□
Wrong direction
□
Graph of this discussion
Enter the title of your article


Enter a short (max 500 characters) summation of your article
Enter the main body of your article
Lock
+Comments (0)
+Citations (0)
+About
Enter comment

Select article text to quote
welcome text

First name   Last name 

Email

Skip