Package-Deal Fallacy
The package-deal fallacy occurs when one assumes that things often grouped together must always be together, or that separating them will have disproportionately severe effects, without evidence. This ignores the possibility of successful separation and adaptation.
THE IDEA
Description
The package-deal fallacy (also known as false conjunction) involves assuming that things that are often grouped together must always be grouped together, or that the ungrouping will have significantly more severe effects than anticipated.
Logical Form
X and Y are usually found together, therefore, X and Y must always be found together, and if they are separated, the separation will have significantly more severe effects than anticipated.
Examples
- Example #1: Michael Jackson’s solo career is a counterexample to the claim that his success required remaining in the Jackson Five. Predicting failure solely from separation would need more support than the fact that he had previously succeeded with the group.
- Example #2: An argument that bars must fail after an indoor smoking ban needs evidence about customer behavior and business outcomes. The fact that smoking and drinking have often occurred together does not establish that they are economically inseparable.
Exception
An exception can be made for personal tastes.
Tip
Ask what makes the combination necessary and what evidence would show that separation is workable.
When to use it
Evaluating whether to unbundle services or products in a business offering.
Assessing the impact of removing a traditionally paired feature from a software product.
Deciding whether to change a long-standing partnership or team structure in a workplace.
Considering the separation of legal or social norms, such as smoking and drinking, to improve public health.
FROM THEORY TO EVERYDAY LIFE
In practice
Michael Jackson and the Jackson Five
Someone predicts that Michael Jackson cannot succeed outside the Jackson Five simply because his success began with the group. His later solo success shows that the combination was not necessary, though it does not by itself reveal what evidence was available for an earlier forecast.
Smoking ban in bars
An opponent of a smoking ban assumes that bars cannot survive if customers cannot smoke indoors. Assess that prediction with evidence about demand and business outcomes rather than assuming that two familiar activities must remain bundled.
A MOMENT TO REFLECT
Put it to work.
Can you think of a time when you assumed a certain combination of things was necessary for success, only to find they could be separated?
What evidence would be needed to determine whether ungrouping two commonly associated things would really lead to severe consequences?
How might the 'package-deal' mindset prevent innovation or positive change in organizations or personal habits?
CONTINUE THE CONVERSATION
Source texts
- Logically Fallacious - The Ultimate Collection of Over 300 Logical Fallacies