The Wrong Conclusion Sniper In Texas

You need to know what a false conclusion is before you try to understand the false conclusion sniper in Texas. In philosophy and more specifically in logic, erroneous conclusions are arguments that initially seem valid, but which contain a bias that completely nullifies the content.

This article will discuss the fallacy of the sniper in Texas. You learn about the origin, what it consists of, and how this phenomenon modifies the way of interpreting and choosing information, to confirm your ideas or beliefs. In addition, you will also see examples of it to understand it a little better, as well as some ideas to prevent it.

The wrong conclusion sniper in Texas

This is a common misconception. It happens when someone interprets, embellishes or manipulates certain information that is basically meaningless until it seems to have a meaning. Either that or until it meets the initial hypothesis.

Through this phenomenon, people make reasonings that prevent any indication that their ideas are wrong. They emphasize all the information that seems to support their hypothesis. Thus, they distort reality and interpret it as it suits them, and disregard the obvious in order to approach what they want to defend through this fallacy.

Origin

You need to know the origin of this phenomenon to better understand it. The name comes from the following story:

“It was a shooter who accidentally fired several shots at a barn. Later, he painted a blink centered around each of them and proclaimed himself a sniper. ”

As you can see, the shooter took the necessary steps to make the action seem logical to prove its worth. In other words, he changed the data (painted the flashes) to confirm the hypothesis (he was a sniper).

According to this fallacy, some thus change observable data to confirm their hypotheses (just as the shooter in history did).

Examples of the sniper in Texas

To continue understanding the sniper in Texas, here is an example you can easily find in your daily life.

Imagine dreaming about number seven while staying in hotel room number 362 (which you were not previously aware of). This fallacy would indicate that you had a dream like 3 + 6 – 2 = 7, and this was the number you dreamed of. In other words, you manipulate the data to confirm your hypothesis.

Another example of this fallacy is the interpretation of constellations. Your culture taught you to draw a series of imaginary lines to connect the stars together and form figures when the position of the stars is in reality determined by chance. In this case, you will ignore the celestial bodies that may distort the figure you are looking for.

Selective information

As you can see, people can devalue information that is not in line with their ideas through the sniper in Texas. They can also manipulate or adjust the information to convince someone (or themselves) of something. In the same way, you magnify the importance of what you intend to defend through this phenomenon.

Another way to interpret this misconception when it comes to choosing information is to ignore the differences that may exist in your data while emphasizing similarities. After making the relevant reasoning, draw a conclusion that may be false.

The illusion of grouping and apophenia

This fallacy is related to what cognitive psychology refers to as the principles of grouping. There is a tendency to see patterns or groupings that are not there.

This fallacy is also related to apophenia, a term used to refer to the experience of seeing patterns and connections in random or meaningless events. This is similar to what you read above.

Note, however, that you can interpret these two concepts introduced from cognitive psychology and from statistics. In fact, they get different nuances from each discipline. For example, cognitive psychology associates them with the sniper in Texas. This is because through the latter one can establish patterns that do not really exist. Everything to justify or demonstrate personal ideas or to convince others of something.

How to Avoid Being a Sniper in Texas

This fallacy, like many others, does not always happen deliberately. Here are some key pointers in moving forward:

• Look for arguments against it. It is important to have good arguments for, but also against any hypothesis.
• You do not always have to be right. In fact, it will help you to demonstrate your ideas logically and objectively.

By doing these two things, along with your awareness of this fallacy, you will be able to argue your ideas in a much better way.