据推测，周围有种族主义者会同意上述内容，但在＃1中提出论证的人中，很少有人会在＃2中提出论点 – 但是，它们在结构上是相同的。这两个过于简单化的例子的原因实际上是另一种因果关系谬误，称为后顽抗谬误。在现实世界中，事件通常具有多个相交的原因，这些原因共同产生我们看到的事件。但是，这种复杂性常常难以理解，甚至更难以改变;不幸的结果是我们简化了事情。有时这不是那么糟糕，但有时它可能是灾难性的。可悲的是，政治是一个过于简单化的领域。这个国家目前缺乏道德标准是由比尔克林顿担任总统时设定的糟糕榜样造成的。当然，克林顿可能没有设定可以想象的最好的例子，但认为他的榜样对整个国家的道德负责是不合理的。再一次，有各种各样的因素可以影响个人和群体的道德。当然，并非所有过度简化的例子都认为是完全不相关的原因：今天的教育不像以前那么好 – 显然，我们的老师没有做好自己的工作。自新总统上任以来，经济一直在改善 – 显然他做得很好，对国家来说也是一种资产。尽管＃4是一个相当严厉的陈述，但不能否认教师的表现会影响学生接受的教育质量。因此，如果他们的教育不是很好，那么一个值得关注的地方就是教师的表现。然而，过分简化的谬论是建议教师是唯一甚至是主要原因。对于＃5，还应该承认总统确实影响了经济状况，有时是为了更好，有时甚至更糟。然而，没有任何一个政治家可以为数万亿美元的经济状况承担唯一的信贷（或唯一的责任）。过度简化的一个常见原因，特别是在政治领域，是个人议程。这是一种非常有效的手段，既可以归功于某些东西（＃5），也可以归咎于他人（＃4）。宗教也是一个容易找到过度简化谬误的领域。例如，考虑一个人在一场重大悲剧中幸存下来之后所听到的回应：为了讨论的目的，我们应该忽略选择拯救某些人而不是其他人的上帝的神学含义。这里的逻辑问题是解雇导致一个人生存的所有其他因素。那些执行救命行动的医生呢？那些在救援工作中花费大量时间和金钱的救援人员呢？制造保护人员的安全装置（如安全带）的产品制造商怎么样？所有这些以及更多因素都是导致事故中人们生存的因果因素，但过于简化情况并将生存归因于一个单一因素的人往往忽略了这些因素：上帝的意志。
It is speculated that racists around will agree to the above, but few of the people who argued in #1 will make arguments in #2 – but they are structurally identical. The reason for these two oversimplified examples is actually another fallacy of causality, called post-resistance fallacy. In the real world, events often have multiple reasons for their intersection, which together produce the events we see. However, this complexity is often difficult to understand and even more difficult to change; the unfortunate result is that we have simplified things. Sometimes this is not so bad, but sometimes it can be catastrophic. Sadly, politics is an area that is too simplistic. The current lack of ethical standards in this country is caused by the poor example set by Bill Clinton as president. Of course, Clinton may not have the best example of imaginable, but it is unreasonable to assume that his example is responsible for the morality of the entire country. Once again, there are a variety of factors that can influence the ethics of individuals and groups. Of course, not all oversimplified examples are considered totally irrelevant: today’s education is not as good as it used to be – obviously, our teachers are not doing their jobs. Since the new president took office, the economy has been improving – obviously he is doing well and is an asset to the country. Although #4 is a rather harsh statement, it cannot be denied that the performance of teachers will affect the quality of education that students receive. Therefore, if their education is not very good, then a place worthy of attention is the performance of teachers. However, the oversimplified paradox suggests that teachers are the only and even the main reason. For #5, it should also be acknowledged that the president does affect the state of the economy, sometimes for better, sometimes even worse. However, no single politician can afford a single credit (or sole responsibility) for trillions of dollars in economic conditions. A common cause of oversimplification, especially in the political arena, is the personal agenda. This is a very effective means of either blaming something (#5) or blaming others (#4). Religion is also an area where it is easy to find excessive simplifications. For example, consider the response that a person hears after surviving a major tragedy: for the purposes of discussion, we should ignore the theological implications of God who choose to save some people, not others. The logical issue here is the dismissal of all other factors that lead to a person’s survival. What about doctors who perform life-saving actions? What about the rescuers who spend a lot of time and money on rescue work? How about a manufacturer of a safety device (such as a seat belt) that protects personnel? All of these and many more are causal factors that lead to the survival of people in accidents, but those who oversimplify the situation and attribute survival to a single factor often overlook these factors: the will of God.