Talk:Correlation does not imply causation

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Icon logic.svg

This Logic related article has not received a brainstar for quality. Please consider expanding the article appropriately.

This article is of MID importance to the wiki.

See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.

Steelbrain.png


Could this article be put in the Logical Fallacy group, under a title such as "The Correlation = Causation Fallacy" --Remarcsd 18:59, 8 October 2007 (EDT)

I agree with the cat, but not the title change. For these reasons:
  1. It is actually what it is called (this phrase is how people bring it up)
  2. "weird" characters in titles can cause unepxected problems. In fact, I think the "=" sign is not permitted. (We had an article with "&" in the title that required database access to delete...)
  3. It is much more likely that someone will type the existing title as a link in an article or talk.
I'll check the cat and see if I can go add it to the logical fallacy article. humanbe in 21:22, 8 October 2007 (EDT)

[edit] Latin phrases

You mention post hoc ergo propter hoc, but omit the phrase cum hoc ergo propter hoc, which refers precisely to the topic of this article...— Unsigned, by: 77.186.140.134 / talk / contribs

And?--ZooGuard (talk) 10:55, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
Sorry, yes, the article is not written very well.--ZooGuard (talk) 10:58, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Title?

I've always heard this as "correlation does not imply causation", which I think is a little more applicable than "equal." Picon small.pngAcer Blue 19:29, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

That is the name of the WP article so move I guess. TyJFBANBSRADA 19:31, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
Yes. ЩєазєюіδWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 19:42, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
Personal tools
Namespaces

Variants
Actions
Navigation
Community
Toolbox
support