Comment on Cum
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation_does_not_imply_causation#
In this case, then, it would be pro hoc, since the crankiness comes after the not eating.
I though it was post hoc, ergo propter hoc? After the fact, therefore because of the fact?
Yeah, that’s what I mean.
The person I was responding to was comparing it to cum hoc which means that the two events being considered simultaneously, which I don’t think is correct.
nahuse@sh.itjust.works 6 months ago
In this case, then, it would be pro hoc, since the crankiness comes after the not eating.
CTDummy@lemm.ee 6 months ago
I though it was post hoc, ergo propter hoc? After the fact, therefore because of the fact?
nahuse@sh.itjust.works 6 months ago
Yeah, that’s what I mean.
The person I was responding to was comparing it to cum hoc which means that the two events being considered simultaneously, which I don’t think is correct.