Open main menu
Home
Random
Recent changes
Special pages
Community portal
Preferences
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Incubator escapee wiki
Search
User menu
Talk
Dark mode
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Editing
Rule of inference
(section)
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
== Formal fallacies == {{main|Formal fallacy}} While rules of inference describe valid patterns of deductive reasoning, formal fallacies are invalid argument forms that involve [[Fallacy|logical errors]]. The premises of a formal fallacy do not properly support its conclusion: the conclusion can be false even if all premises are true. Formal fallacies often mimic the structure of valid rules of inference and can thereby mislead people into unknowingly committing them and accepting their conclusions.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Copi|Cohen|Flage|2016|pp=46β47, 227}} | {{harvnb|Cook|2009|p=123}} | {{harvnb|Hurley|Watson|2018|pp=125β126, 723}} }}</ref> The formal fallacy of [[affirming the consequent]] concludes <math>P</math> from the premises <math>P \to Q</math> and <math>Q</math>, as in the argument "If Leo is a cat, then Leo is an animal. Leo is an animal. Therefore, Leo is a cat." This fallacy resembles valid inferences following ''modus ponens'', with the key difference that the fallacy swaps the second premise and the conclusion.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Copi|Cohen|Flage|2016|pp=224, 439}} | {{harvnb|Hurley|Watson|2018|pp=385β386, 720}} }}</ref> The formal fallacy of [[denying the antecedent]] concludes <math>\lnot Q</math> from the premises <math>P \to Q</math> and <math>\lnot P</math>, as in the argument "If Laya saw the movie, then Laya had fun. Laya did not see the movie. Therefore, Laya did not have fun." This fallacy resembles valid inferences following ''modus tollens'', with the key difference that the fallacy swaps the second premise and the conclusion.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Copi|Cohen|Flage|2016|pp=46, 228, 442}} | {{harvnb|Hurley|Watson|2018|pp=385β386, 722}} }}</ref> Other formal fallacies include [[affirming a disjunct]], the [[existential fallacy]], and the [[fallacy of the undistributed middle]].<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Copi|Cohen|Flage|2016|pp=443, 449}} | {{harvnb|Hurley|Watson|2018|pp=723, 728}} | {{harvnb|Cohen|2009|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=4aGIsKmkODgC&pg=PA254 254]}} }}</ref>
Edit summary
(Briefly describe your changes)
By publishing changes, you agree to the
Terms of Use
, and you irrevocably agree to release your contribution under the
CC BY-SA 4.0 License
and the
GFDL
. You agree that a hyperlink or URL is sufficient attribution under the Creative Commons license.
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)