Which fallacy suggests that just because one event precedes another, it must be the cause of it?

The concept identified in this question refers to a logical fallacy that assumes a causal relationship based solely on the chronological order of events. The Latin term "Post hoc ergo propter hoc" translates to "after this, therefore because of this." This fallacy arises when it is concluded that one event must have caused another simply because it occurred first.

For example, if someone argues that because it started to rain after they washed their car, the act of washing the car caused the rain, they are committing this fallacy. The mere sequence of events does not establish a causal relationship; other factors could be at play. Understanding this fallacy is crucial for critical thinking and effective argumentation, as it highlights the importance of examining the evidence and recognizing that correlation does not equate to causation.

In contrast to this, the other terms provided in the options refer to different logical fallacies or concepts. "Circulus in demonstrando" involves circular reasoning, "Argumentum ad numerum" refers to an appeal to popularity or numbers, and "Cum hoc ergo propter hoc" suggests that because two events occur together, one must cause the other, which is a distinct form of fallacy from the one described here.