search

Appeal to Possibility

Description: When a conclusion is assumed not because it is probably true, but because it is possible that it is true, no matter how improbable.

Logical Forms:

X is possible.

Therefore, X is true.



X is possible.

Therefore, X is probably true.

Example #1:

Brittany: I haven’t applied to any other schools besides Harvard.

Casey: You think that is a good idea?  After all, you only have a 2.0 GPA, your SAT scores were pretty bad, and frankly, most people think you are not playing with a full deck.

Brittany: Are you telling me that it is impossible for me to get in?

Casey: Not *impossible*, but...

Brittany: Then shut your trap.

Explanation: Yes, it is possible that Harvard will accept Brittany to fill some sympathy quota, or perhaps someone at admissions will mix Brittany up with “Britney”, the 16-year-old Asian with the 4.0 average who also discovered a vaccine for a rare flu in her spare time, but because Brittany is appealing to possibility, she is committing this fallacy.

Example #2:

Dave: Did you know that Jesus liked to dress up as a woman and sing show tunes?

Tim: And why do you say that?

Dave: You have to admit, it is possible!

Tim: So is the fact that you are a moron.

Explanation: We cannot assume Jesus liked to dress like a woman while belting out 2000-year-old show tunes based on the possibility alone. This also includes the argument from ignorance fallacy -- concluding a possibility based on missing information (an outright statement that Jesus did not do these things).

Exception:  There are no exceptions. Possibility alone never justifies probability.

Tip: Catch yourself every time you are about to use the word “impossible”.  Yes, there are many things that are logically and physically impossible, and it is a valid concept and word, but so often we use that word when we really mean  “improbable”.  Confusing the impossible with the improbable or unlikely, could, in many cases, destroy the possibility of great success.

References:

This a logical fallacy frequently used on the Internet. No academic sources could be found.
Questions about this fallacy? Ask our community!

Eat Meat... Or Don't.

Roughly 95% of Americans don’t appear to have an ethical problem with animals being killed for food, yet all of us would have a serious problem with humans being killed for food. What does an animal lack that a human has that justifies killing the animal for food but not the human?

As you start to list properties that the animal lacks to justify eating them, you begin to realize that some humans also lack those properties, yet we don’t eat those humans. Is this logical proof that killing and eating animals for food is immoral? Don’t put away your steak knife just yet.

In Eat Meat… Or Don’t, we examine the moral arguments for and against eating meat with both philosophical and scientific rigor. This book is not about pushing some ideological agenda; it’s ultimately a book about critical thinking.

Get 20% off this book and all Bo's books*. Use the promotion code: websiteusers

* This is for the author's bookstore only. Applies to autographed hardcover, audiobook, and ebook.

Get the Book