To produce *arguments* against NHST (Null Hypothesis Statistical Tests) people remind the Jacob Cohen´s *paradox*: 1) Is very rare an American be Member of Congress, 2) Given that John Smith is a member Conclusion: is very unlike John Smith being an American . . . __________ I thought Cohen´s was kidding me, I mean, the first time I got the reasoning. First of all: Since one arrives to an evident nonsense Cohen, instead to try to find where the fallacy was, accept there is something wrong (naively or intentionally). Secondly: if we take into account that a necessary quality (without any exception) to be a member of the Congress is the American Citizenship the conclusion loses any sense at all. Third: The depending on chance events (probabilistic) are not governed by Classical Deductive Logic, rather from Inductive one: from the particular to the general not from the general to the particular: ___All humans are mortal, Socrates is human: then Socrates is mortal.