Logical Fallacy of Comparing Two Things Statistically that are not Technically Comparable / Statistical Apples and Oranges

Statistical apples and oranges is one of the many smokescreens that are used to cover the fact that the reasoning is based on one of the three fallacies of Agrippa's trilemma. Whenever a logical fallacy is committed, the fallacy has its roots in Agrippa's trilemma. All human thought (without Divine revelation) is based on one of three unhappy possibilities. These three possibilities are infinite regress, circular reasoning, or axiomatic thinking. This problem is known as Agrippa's trilemma. Some have claimed that only logic and math can be known without Divine revelation; however, that is not true. There is no reason to trust either logic or math without Divine revelation. Science is also limited to the pragmatic because of the weakness on human reasoning, which is known as Agrippa's trilemma.

The Logical Fallacy of Comparing Two Things Statistically that are not Technically Comparable / Statistical Apples and Oranges occurs when certain element of two unrelated things are compared statistically. By the way, you can indeed compare apples to oranges, but not for some purposes. You can compare which one you would prefer to eat, for instance. You can statistically compare the financial return on farming them. However, there are many times where it is irrational to compare two things depending on what you are trying to prove.

Examples of the Logical Fallacy of Comparing Two Things Statistically that are not Technically Comparable / Statistical Apples and Oranges

Sandy: "I can tell you that I am a much better person than most Christians that I have seen."

Rocky: "Based on what standard?"

There are many things wrong with Sandy's claim. First, without God's Law, there is no absolute standard. Agrippa's Trilemma creates a situation in which (without Divine revelation) it is impossible to make any sound conclusion about anything. This is even more true when making conclusions about what is a valid standard of a "good person." Sandy's sample size is far to small as well.

Regarding the comparison of two things that cannot be rationally compared, however, Sandy's statement falls apart.

We will have to assume that Sandy is defining righteousness ("better person") according to the standards of God. We will make what is probably a false assumption that Sandy's "Christians" were all following Christ, know Christ personally, and either slipped or walked off of the path that leads to the genuine and absolute fullness of life of the coming Age, since this is what sin is. We make this assumption merely to show the difference between one who is following Christ and one who is not. It is impossible to know if these people in Sandy's survey were actually following Christ, actually had a relationship in which Christ was leading them moment by moment, and actually had a total commitment to pressing toward that high calling. For the sake of the illustration, though, we will assume that the do have that relationship and commitment. If they have that relationship, they are learning to hear the Voice of the Christ, the Holy Spirit, leading them, and they are learning to respond in submission.

In that case, whatever they do that is not in response to God's leading is sin, a slipping/stepping from the path of life. If they sin because of emotion of the moment, immaturity, or the fact that their own fleshly nature deceived them, they have slipped from the path. At that point, the Holy Spirit will speak to them and make every effort to get them to turn and return to the path of life. They will be forgiven. If they knowingly step into sin, going to a party they knew they should not go to, going on a date they should not have gone to, stealing, telling a lie, committing adultery, hurting someone, or any other sin, the Holy Spirit will speak into their innermost mind, their conscience. He will be their helper to return to the path of life. God will forgive them because they are born sons by the blood of Jesus Christ.

Now, let's consider Sandy. Sandy is not a born son of God through the blood of Jesus Christ. His sins are not covered. He is living in self-righteousness while refusing to cooperate at all with the Holy Spirit at any level. He is standing in judgement of God's born sons. He is trying to declare himself "good" by his own efforts to obey the Law (if it even is the Law of God that he is using). He has no hope of doing so perfectly, which is what is required. The first, and most important Command of that Law is to love the Lord, your God, with all your heart, soul, and mind. This is the Command that Sandy doesn't want to obey at all. He is rejecting Christ, the only way to approach the Father. He is lost and without hope.