Chapter 6 question from "Animal Farm":
The discovery of pig footprints leading away from the windmill into the hedge is given as proof that Snowball sabotaged the windmill. What is the fallacy in this logic?
Question was too long, thank you in advance :]
There are several logical flaws in the argument. The argument is that there were pig footprints leading from the windmill. Snowball is a pig. Therefore the footprints belong to Snowball. However, this is a hasty generalization because there is more than one pig on the farm. The footprints could belong to Napoleon, Squealer or any one of the other pigs. The other assumption is that the footprints were left by the one who sabotaged the windmill. This is an example of post hoc, or attributing false causes to an event. It is also an example of jumping to conclusions before there is an adequate amount of evidence and non sequitur because just because there were pig footprints left at the windmill, it does not follow that the prints were left specifically by Snowball or the saboteur.