Denying the Antecedent is a type of flawed “if-then” argument which claims that a “then” statement is false because an “if” statement is also false. Like “If you have a dog, you are a pet owner. You do not have a dog. Therefore, you are not a pet owner.” Using real examples from the origins controversy, let’s see when Denying the Antecedent is (and isn’t) a fallacy.
Correction to video: At the 1:48 mark, Patricia said, "Both argument structures are invalid if there are other ways the conclusion could be true, besides the given premises," but meant, "...if there's any way the conclusion could be false, even if the non-conditional premise is true."
Is it a fallacy to say that evolutionary beliefs can lead to serious social consequences? Slippery slope arguments, which propose that an action or attitude will lead to some negative outcome, are considered fallacies if the dreaded outcome isn’t really likely given the premises. Here are some ti...
Either-or fallacies present only two mutually exclusive options (correlatives), when more options may be possible. But there are other types of correlative-based fallacies too. Here are some examples of the most common ones—and an easy bonus hack for answering faulty “if-then” arguments.
