We all like to believe things that make us feel good. But when our desires cloud our judgment about what’s actually true, we run into trouble. That’s where the mental model “Appeal to Consequences” comes into play. This simple yet powerful tool helps us avoid basing our beliefs on what we want to be true, rather than what is true.
1. What is Appeal to Consequences?
The Appeal to Consequences is a logical fallacy where you argue that a proposition is true or false based on whether its consequences are desirable or undesirable. In simpler terms, it’s saying, “This must be true, because if it wasn’t, it would be terrible” or conversely, “This can’t be true, because if it were, it would be awful.”
Think of it like this: imagine a child insisting that the cookie jar is empty because they don’t want to be in trouble for eating all the cookies. Their desire (avoiding punishment) influences their claim about the reality of the cookie jar (empty or full).
This model isn’t rooted in one specific academic discipline. It’s a logical fallacy recognized across fields like philosophy, rhetoric, and critical thinking. It highlights a common flaw in human reasoning, stemming from our tendency to let emotions and desires influence our perception of reality.
2. How It Works
The Appeal to Consequences works by short-circuiting logical reasoning. Instead of examining evidence and forming a conclusion based on that evidence, it jumps directly to the potential outcomes of a belief and then works backward to determine its truthfulness.
Here’s a simple framework:
- Proposition: A statement being considered.
- Consequence (Desired or Undesired): The potential outcome of the proposition being true or false.
- Conclusion (Based on Consequence): The proposition is deemed true (if the consequence is desirable) or false (if the consequence is undesirable) regardless of supporting evidence.
Imagine a lever. On one side, you have the proposition and the evidence for and against it. On the other side, you have the desired or feared consequence. The Appeal to Consequences puts all the weight on the consequence side, ignoring the evidence completely.
3. Examples of the Model in Action
Let’s look at some examples of the Appeal to Consequences in different areas:
Business: “We must launch this new product, even if the market research is weak. If we don’t, our competitors will beat us, and the company will fail!” Here, the fear of failure (undesirable consequence) is driving the decision, potentially overriding sound business judgment based on available data.
Personal Life: “My partner would never cheat on me. If they did, I don’t know what I’d do. So, they definitely haven’t.” The devastating emotional impact of infidelity (undesirable consequence) leads to a denial of potentially concerning behavior.
Science: (Historically, though rarer now) “The Earth cannot be revolving around the sun. If it were, the Bible would be wrong, and that’s impossible!” This example highlights how deeply held beliefs (religious dogma) can lead to rejecting scientific evidence (heliocentric model) due to the perceived undesirable consequences of accepting it.
4. Common Misunderstandings or Pitfalls
A common mistake is confusing Appeal to Consequences with legitimate risk assessment. Considering the potential outcomes of a decision is not inherently fallacious. The fallacy arises when those potential outcomes are used to determine the truth of a claim, rather than influencing a decision based on that claim.
For example: Saying “We shouldn’t invest in this startup because if it fails, we’ll lose a lot of money” is not an Appeal to Consequences. It’s a rational risk assessment based on potential negative outcomes. However, saying “This startup must succeed because if it doesn’t, we’ll lose a lot of money” is an Appeal to Consequences because the fear of financial loss is dictating the belief in the startup’s success, regardless of the evidence.
5. How to Apply It in Daily Life
Here are a few practical tips to apply the Appeal to Consequences in your daily life:
Ask “So What?” Regularly: When evaluating a statement, challenge yourself by asking, “So what if that were true (or false)? How does that relate to the actual evidence?” This forces you to separate the potential consequences from the factual basis.
Seek Objective Evidence: Actively look for independent evidence that supports or contradicts a claim. Don’t rely solely on your gut feeling or what you want to be true.
Embrace Discomfort: Be willing to accept uncomfortable truths. Avoiding unpleasant realities might provide temporary relief, but it can lead to poor decisions in the long run.
Consider Alternative Explanations: Always consider multiple explanations for events. Don’t jump to the conclusion that feels most desirable; explore other possibilities.
6. Related Mental Models
The Appeal to Consequences connects with other useful mental models:
Confirmation Bias: The tendency to seek out and interpret information that confirms existing beliefs. We’re more likely to believe what aligns with our desires, making us susceptible to the Appeal to Consequences.
Availability Heuristic: Overestimating the likelihood of events that are easily recalled, often because they are emotionally charged or recent. Fearful consequences (linked to the Appeal to Consequences) can become more readily available in our minds, skewing our perception of reality.
First Principles Thinking: Breaking down complex problems into their fundamental truths and reasoning from there. This helps avoid emotional reasoning and encourages objective analysis.
By understanding the Appeal to Consequences, you can become a more rational thinker, less swayed by wishful thinking, and better equipped to make sound decisions based on evidence, not just desires. So, next time you find yourself wanting something to be true, pause and ask yourself: am I letting the desired consequence cloud my judgment? The answer might surprise you.