Contents

How to Use This Guide

Search

Privacy and Security

Contact

Home Page

All Fallacies

The Fallacies

False Dilemma

Argument From Ignorance

Slippery Slope

Complex Question

Appeal to Force

Appeal to Pity

Appeal to Consequences

Prejudicial Language

Appeal to Popularity

Anonymous Authorities

Coincidental Correlation

Attacking the Person

Appeal to Authority

Converse Accident

Style Over Substance

Unrepresentative Sample

Hasty Generalization

False Analogy

Slothful Induction

Fallacy of Exclusion

Accident

Joint Effect

Genuine but Insignificant Cause

Wrong Direction

Complex Cause

Begging the Question

Irrelevant Conclusion

Straw Man

Equivocation

Amphiboly

Accent

Composition

Division

Affirming the Consequent

Denying the Antecedent

Inconsistency

Fallacy of Four Terms

Undistributed Middle

Illicit Major

Illicit Minor

Fallacy of Exclusive Premises

Drawing an Affirmative Conclusion From a Negative Premise

Existential Fallacy

Subverted Support

Non-Support

Untestability

Limited Scope

Limited Depth

Too Broad

Too Narrow

Existential Fallacy

Category: fallacies:

Definition: A particular conclusion is drawn from universal premises

Examples:

• All mice are animals, and all animals are dangerous, so some mice are dangerous.
,
• No honest people steal, and all honest people pay taxes, so some honest people pay taxes.

Proof:

A standard form categorical syllogism with two universal premises has a particular conclusion. The idea is that some universal properties need not be instantiated. It may be true that 'all trespassers will be shot' even if there are no trespassers. It may be true that 'all brakeless trains are dangerous' even though there are no brakeless trains. That is the point of this fallacy.

Assume that the premises are true, but that there are no instances of the category described. For example, in (i) above, assume there are no mice, and in (ii) above, assume there are no honest people. This shows that the conclusion is false. Copi and Cohen: 210