━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━THE ARGUMENT STRUCTURE━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━Data: When savings rate ↓, unemployment rate ↓ (they move together)
Conclusion: Reducing savings rate will ADDRESS unemployment
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━THE FLAW: CORRELATION ≠ CAUSATION━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━What the argument SEES:Savings rate ↓
happens together with Unemployment ↓
What the argument CONCLUDES:Savings rate ↓
CAUSES Unemployment ↓
THE PROBLEM:Just because two things happen
TOGETHER doesn't mean one
CAUSES the other!
Other possibilities:•
Reverse causation: Maybe low unemployment causes low savings rate
•
Third factor: Maybe economic growth causes BOTH to decline
•
Coincidence: Maybe they just happen to move together
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━EXAMPLE━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━"When ice cream sales go up, drowning deaths go up too. Therefore, reducing ice cream sales will reduce drownings."
Obviously wrong!Both are caused by a
THIRD FACTOR (hot summer weather), not by each other.
Same flaw here — the argument sees correlation and assumes causation.
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ELIMINATING ANSWERS━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━(A) Repeats claim without support
→
Wrong: Argument DOES provide data as support ✗
(B) Assumes two events occurring together means one causes the other
→
YES! Classic correlation vs causation flaw ✓
(C) Mistakes small incident for larger trend
→
Wrong: Data since 2009 IS a trend, not small incident ✗
(D) Relies on diversionary tactics
→
Wrong: No diversionary tactics present ✗
(E) Assumes claim is true because not proven false
→
Wrong: This is "appeal to ignorance" — not the flaw here ✗
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━KEY TAKEAWAY━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━Whenever you see an argument that says:
"X and Y happen together, therefore X causes Y"
The flaw is
CORRELATION ≠ CAUSATIONAnswer: B