What logical fallacy is demonstrated by assuming leg workouts are safe based solely on the success of past champions?

The assumption that leg workouts are safe solely based on the success of past champions exemplifies a non sequitur fallacy. This type of fallacy occurs when a conclusion does not logically follow from the premises provided. In this case, the argument relies on the success of champions, suggesting that their achievements imply safety in leg workouts, without providing a direct connection or evidence that success guarantees safety. The conclusion overlooks other factors that may influence both the champions' success and the safety of the workouts.

Understanding non sequitur is essential, as it highlights the importance of logical connections in arguments. By basing a claim on unrelated or insufficient evidence, one can mislead others or draw faulty conclusions, which is a common pitfall in many persuasive contexts. Thus, recognizing this fallacy can help identify flawed reasoning in arguments about exercise and many other subjects.