Fallacentricity - The Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy

[ganglerfish]

THIS VIDEO IS AWESOME!

[postcardsky]

Contrived fallacies are my favorite. Nothing says Denial like a Rube Goldbergian effort to explain why the obvious is wrong.

[YooToobBaller]

moar!

[Bhatch2007]

I like it. Keep it.

[Mystro1989]

is this the same as the induction falacy in your david hume video?

[WretchX]

Probability pounds on fallacy once again. If the gameshow host offers you the swap, you should always take it.

[AssistingHealth]

I do lots of these on my site

blogDOTpragmaticpsychologyDOTc­om

[Donizen]

I live near that old ABC studio in Brisbane and nearly every time I drove past there was a group of ladies outside smoking. I have always wondered why this was never mentioned in any media report on this. Hmmm.

[VintageburstStandard]

@Donizen It likely would have if these women had contracted lung cancer, but they didn't. They contracted breast cancer. If it is caused by the consumption of any tobacco related product, it will almost always manifest itself either orally, or in the lungs.

[mrgerbeck]

Not buying it. I wouldn't work at that radio station. Would you?

[salvagebar]

@mrgerbeck Even if I wouldn't work there (I would, after answering some questions), it just proves that I am not a perfectly rational agent, not that something there causes cancer.

[mrgerbeck]

@salvagebar Your pretext here is that it would be rational to work there yet you can not rationally prove that assertion. A statistical model on coin flip probabilities assumes a perfectly balanced coin but no coin is perfect and furthermore some actual are rigged. On the contrary we may find good model coins by flipping them over long periods and choosing the ones that closer match a 50/50 model. Not working at a radio station with high cancer rates is more rational than you give credit for.

[MetalSnakesUK]

If college binary told me that id live longer if i shat my pants, i would probably do it.

In college binary we trust! He does the difficult thinking, so we dont have to!

[Sewblon]

"Every event has a cause" is true under the hidden variable hypothesis and the relative state hypothesis, but not under the Copenhagen interpretation. I know this because Wikipedia told me.

[RideMyBMW]

Is it true that if you get hit by a car once, you´re less likely to get hit a second time?

[seiferganon]

@RideMyBMW Yes, but only for two reasons:

1. You died, thus removing the possibly that you'll walk across the street ever again.

2. You learned your lesson and will look both ways next time.

It's not as if the cars will magically go around you, but your behavior will change as you attempt to lower the risk that it will happen again.

[UnbrokenCovenant]

@RideMyBMW Well yeah, like seiferganon said, and also its like your likelihood of getting cancer, then getting rid of it, then getting it again, and getting rid of it. Go back to the first time you get rid of it and it sounds more probable. you dig?

[sammosammy]

I would very much like seeing more of this series sometime soon. I think it's just as brilliant, if not more brilliant, than TMP. This is the kind of things you're much more likely to be able to use in real life arguments, unless all of your friends have a heavy Philosophy background.

[mrwas2000atgmailcom]

so was it the radio waves?

[TheArkTheArkTheArk]

That was...a bit odd. I think you should avoid doing that beginning part if you're going to do any more of these. You sounded so deadly serious when you were describing the office and the radio waves=cancer that I thought you were, even though I knew it was an example of the fallacy. Kind of set a confusing tone for the rest of the video.

[Sonofkong0]

Cancuh!

[wawabunny]

Dont be gay and running away from nietzsche

make a fukin video about nietzsche

[pumblechook101]

See Catching Cancer on YouTube to see more about the ABC case.

[pumblechook101]

Great concept, although you have a few important facts about the ABC case wrong. It's 16 women diagnosed not 10. It was a TV station primarily. And it has been shown via statistics and epidemiology that this is unlikely to be random! The science of that case doesn't quite fit the point you are making. However the general principle about clusters and odds is right on.

[dragoninthesun]

YAY!

[jaminunit]

I work at channel 9 in Sydney and dont drink the water from the water cooler and stay away from my bosses cologne. Damb it how do I get away from the radiation!

[amm1204able]

The satirical nature of this video is witty well presented, not unlike your response video to Gorilla 199. However, there is still a great question lurking in the deepest crevice of my temporal lobe. Are you a or are you not a freemason as well as a tare. If so, then I think you are tare-iffic!!!!

[CalabreseMPC]

ur a boss bruz! oh shit!!

[jackson8777]

good use of analogy

[ColourBlindHero]

This video reminds me of Paul the octopus.

[zerodan1]

I'm gonna die from something. That's not coincidence.

[thelostpiranha]

When I watched this over 200 people had liked this video, so would anyone notice if I disliked it?

[Clitorisaurus]

let's have babies

[J1e2s3u4s4u3s2e1J]

Yeah ther was something exactly like this in my country: a placebo experiment on a disease that kills 10 percent of people had resulted in the new medicine killing 26 people, while the placebo-group had 9 casualties out of 300. this seems horrible until you count up the casualties and find out that the medicine just didn't work instead of kill the people in the group

[Amkid69]

Causation Vs. Correlation Fallacy.

[ThePythagoran]

It seems to me as though this fallacy suggests science is doomed to hit the brick wall of the induction fallacy. Not to say that science doesn't provide much, if not all, good actionable intelligence in the world but....queue the flaming in three..two...one... maybe science is not a viable source for absolutes?

[sammosammy]

I kinda like the music and lack of jokes. It makes this video seem edgier. I can't quite put why I like it into words, but I'd recommend keeping it as is.

Never change the 3 Minute Philosophy videos though. Changes to that series is punishable by death.

[kianatehrani]

I know that the existence of this video doesn't necessitate or guarantee that you will make more videos like this in the future... but... I really hope you make more videos like this. Soon. :3

[theoriginal42]

Glad to see you're still making videos, but the sound on this one seems off. I agree that getting rid of the background music might be a good idea, but it also seems like the voice quality was a lot fuzzier and quieter on this one. Good material though.

[shenyain]

Gotta say this is your best work after Three Minute Philosophy. However, you need to give us basic examples instead of profound one's like in three minute philosophy. You sound natural in three minute philosophy because of that funny/witty and knowledgeable tune you have, over here it seems you're trying too hard. In my humble opinion: Get rid of the music, make it a bit funnier (recycling jokes always helps) and you'll be on your way to be a human wikipedia of philosophy on YouTube

[0manGy]

Whats with this music....The video is still great though!

[kerplunk288]

DO POST HOC ERGO PROPTER HOC!  Pwease...

[Mexicanseafooduk]

get rid of the background music.

[2hamsters1couple]

@Mexicanseafooduk He'd have to delete the video and reupload it. You've already seen it so it shouldn't bother you.

[Enecah]

PLEASE KEEP DOING THIS, BUT DON'T PUT MUSIC IN THE BACKGROUND IT'S REALLY DISTRACTING.

[tanist2]

I came across this video by serendipity...

[DarkKnightBob1o1]

That's right bitches, this is fucking statistics.

[Satansbitch101]

fu***ng techno music

[4ta2r]

this is definitely something you keep up on, but you should tag it as 3 minute philosophy so that people will pay more attention to it.

[MrPughg]

A great video! I hope to see more like it.

[keymaker2112]

Loved it, underlining the correlation =/= causation in a very entertaining fashion.

[KDPhilosophy]

This was fun, hope to see more :)

[HankAndrews]

I like it!

[meltingwitch]

I enjoy all your videos immensely? immensly? imensely? Ohhh fuck it, I like em' alot.

[Spalg]

@eltavolt

>implying we know jack pewp about quantum physics

[2naruto1]

moo

[Kingaxel1]

Your videos always educate me, please keep up the great work!

[sputnikowns]

Excellent.

[JoeM007]

you should do the naturalistic fallacy or ad hominem fallacy next

[imgordonfreeman]

brailiant! love the new series

[cronullasharks13]

LOVE THE NEW SERIES. KEEP IT UP :)

[TheVodkaHaze]

Nice video. I think I think I can now point out this fallacy at school.

[arpee9216]

Awesome.

Here are some 3 minute philosophy ideas: buddhism, Jainism, Nihilism, and Taoism

[FisandCram]

well, I have to say that scientist can't admit it's radio waves that cause cancer, just like they cant admit that WiFi causes children harm, or that cellphone use leads to cancer... why? Simply because we don't understand how could non-ionising radiation, in fact, low power radio waves cause DNA mutations. Why? because it takes a high power particle to destroy a DNA, for example: gamma particle, beta or even alpha particle.

They are studying. Hopefully they'll come up with an answer.

[Checker222]

I like it, but you forget, that the radio waves TOLD YOU TO MAKE THIS VIDEO!

JK, thumbs up :)

[chrisofnottingham]

I fully understand this fallacy but also it would be a remiss person who didn't investigate cases like this.

The Sally Clark case in UK (sudden infant death) is a classic example where, quite rightly, an investigation was launched based on an unlikely event occurring. The case then went badly wrong when the only evidence presented was the unlikeliness of the event and also an 'expert' witness got the numbers completely wrong and didn't account for the possibility of confounding variables.

[CollegeBinary]

@chrisofnottingham Oh don't get me wrong. Certainly it's important to investigate cases like this. Where people go wrong in situations like cancer clusters is that they WON'T ACCEPT it if the investigation concludes it is coincidence. 

[chrisofnottingham]

@CollegeBinary Indeed. The Sally Clark case is an example of exactly that situation. Another outrageous example is the case of the Dutch nurse Lucy De Berk who was jailed for about 6 years before the legal system finally got its act together.

[neoporcupine]

@CollegeBinary Of course this isn't an unreasonable thing to do, even if wrong. Something perceived to cause harm is best avoided, even if it doesn't. Also; no evidence of a causal link does not mean there is not one.

Consider the ~reverse situation: if a person doesn't directly observe any evidence of harm from smoking they might infer smoking is harmless, particularly when this industry funded scientist says that smoking is harmless.

To sum up: don't trust your brain!

[iDaruma]

@neoporcupine What about vaccines? Where people see something that's actually protecting people from an array of diseases, and assume that it's doing harm, because a few kids got diagnosed with autism after getting their vaccine? That's a pretty unreasonable thing to do.

[neoporcupine]

@iDaruma Consider that anti-vaccine-nutters don't hear about all the kids protected, the only evidence presented is of those kids who took the vaccine that subsequently became ill. They assume a causal link, their mind fixes this and "conservative brain" kicks in to dismiss counter-evidence ~ you have high risk vs vague benefits. Add a scare campaign claiming the counter evidence is funded by big pharma and you're set.

[JQuile0881]

@CollegeBinary this statement is overly general. I dont believe once a study fails, the people running it simply don't want to give up like worker bees. Like you said in this video, everything happens for a reason. Some people fall victim to delusional fallacies most people who keep a study going for longer than it should are often trying to make the study show certain data for they or their companies own benefit, rather than truth seeking. Often, dishonesty gets the best us, not complacency.

[255ad]

@CollegeBinary you would have to set a random character generator program on your computer and leave it running for about 13000000000 years (the age of the universe) to just get 17 letter phrase like "to be or not to b"

you would have to flip coin a lot more then a 1000000000 times to get a hundred heads in row the odds are more like 1 out of 1,267,650,600,228, 229,401,496,703,205,376.

[S4NDWRA1TH]

@255ad Well, flip a coin 100 times. Write your result. You have the same odds to get 100 heads in a row than to get what you did get.

[255ad]

@S4NDWRA1TH true but the odds of getting ant particular arrangement of a hundred head and tiles is highly unlikely but me getting an arrangement is almost 100%

[255ad]

@S4NDWRA1TH what's your point

[S4NDWRA1TH]

@255ad "you would have to flip coin a lot more then a 1000000000 times to get a hundred heads in row " That's false. That's "my point".

[255ad]

@S4NDWRA1TH yes a suppose me stating it as an absolute was a fallacy (but it highly unlikely) but so is him stating it as something that it likely in 1000000000 flips witch it really is't

[ParrhesiaJoe]

@CollegeBinary Don't get me wrong... I agree :) However, if you flipped heads forty times in a row... BY FAR the most likely cause is a trick coin or some other causal factor.

This brings us to the next point. People have a hard time with really big and really small numbers. Your example of 240 heads landing in a row would probably not occur even once if every person that ever existed constantly flipped one thousand coins a second for the entire lifespan of planet earth.

[Shadowmil2]

@ParrhesiaJoe lol beat me to it, if you wanna know the number of times you would have to flip, its 2^240 Which is quite large, some 1.76 times 10 to the power of 72.

Also have a disagreement with this video about the number of offices in the world.

But while numbers in the video might be off, the concepts are spot on.

[pkwithobby]

Was reading about this on youarenotsosmart the other day lol

[TheHomelessCripple]

this is almost as good as Apnea Training!

[patienceking]

I approve of Authentic Old West Soundtrack

[rottenspectre]

head head HEAD

[anotherdumbaccount]

Excited for this series. Good stuff man!

[MagnesiumMichael]

I like this new series!

[NotTehSuck]

Another excellent video.

Though I suspect your argument may be deeply phalluscious.

[GlorifiedTruth]

I have renamed this the "Grandpa's Pee Stain Around the Toilet Fallacy." And I am quickly becoming Grandpa.

Good video, BTW.

[Hythloday71]

I'd like to see a fallacy series that 'really' illustrates how one can expect to 'hear' them come up in day to day arguments about politics n stuff. Great vid though.

[ZackServo]

@Hythloday71 aristotle and an aardvark go to washington, great book that has exactly what you want.

[Hythloday71]

@ZackServo - thank you very much for the ref. one day i hope to doing some videos along them lines, hopefully the book will help. I'm still way 2 slow at walking away from arguments and only later realising i've been strawmaned, ad hom etc to death, they begin so god damn reasonably so often .. again cheers will defo get.

[GrimmReaperVI]

I approve of any series in this channel.

[Jeddas]

I like this.

[miiwiiplay]

My only issue with it is that the music's a bit loud, and your voice is a bit soft. I can't hear you very well.

[WolfSyndrome]

@miiwiiplay audio's fine on my computer...I have new speakers too...check your speakers

[nyihead]

really like it. preferred the philosophy things but thats a very interesting video

[shedininja001]

wow. mind is blown.

[shalalablup]

Interesting!

[nedwarp]

It wasn't remotely wrong for the scientists to try to find a cause to the breast cancer or even assume it wasn't coincidence though, especially considering the workplace.

[dannyboyfour]

Get a better mic.

Other than that this is a good idea for a series.

[StunOperator237]

Hey, a new series! Again, nice job explaining the subject in layman's terms.

[Cathartick]

Fantastic vid! :)

[Sn3kz]

Good