When you utilize logical thinking... You can turn it around and say 2 boxers who have never had a fight yet where one boxer says "I'm not gonna punch that other boxer because I've never punch him before." It would confuse a lot of people to hear that!
Do you need a linguist or a logician?
There's nothing wrong with the statement grammatically.
There's everything wrong with the statement logically.
Correlation / Causation fallacy.
Denying the antecedent is the type of fallacy.
"Past performance is not a guarantee of future results."
When you utilize logical thinking... You can turn it around and say 2 boxers who have never had a fight yet where one boxer says "I'm not gonna punch that other boxer because I've never punch him before." It would confuse a lot of people to hear that!
normalcy bias?
https://onemindtherapy.com/social-psychology/diffusion-of-responsibility/ Here ya go
inductive fallacy perhaps?
Argumentum ad logicam. * (The conclusion is assumed to be bad because the argument is bad.)*
I'd love to help, but I really only specialize in bird law.