Denying the antecedent

Denying the antecedent, sometimes also called inverse error, is a formal fallacy, committed by reasoning in the form:

If P, then Q.

Not P.

Therefore, not Q.

Arguments of this form are invalid. Informally, this means that arguments of this form do not give good reason to establish their conclusions, even if their premises are true.

The name denying the antecedent derives from the premise "not P", which denies the "if" clause of the conditional premise.

One way to demonstrate the invalidity of this argument form is with a counterexample with true premises but an obviously false conclusion. For example:

If Queen Elizabeth is an American citizen, then she is a human being.

Queen Elizabeth is not an American citizen.

Therefore, Queen Elizabeth is not a human being.

That argument is obviously bad, but arguments of the same form can sometimes seem superficially convincing, as in the following example imagined by Alan Turing in the article "Computing Machinery and Intelligence":

If each man had a definite set of rules of conduct by which he regulated his life he would be no better than a machine. But there are no such rules, so men cannot be machines.^[1]

However, men could still be machines that do not follow a definite set of rules. Thus this argument (as Turing intends) is invalid.

It is possible that an argument that denies the antecedent could be valid, if the argument instantiates some other valid form. For example, if the claims P and Q express the same proposition, then the argument would be trivially valid, as it would beg the question. In everyday discourse, however, such cases are rare, typically only occurring when the "if-then" premise is actually an "if and only if" claim (i.e., a biconditional). For example:

If I am President of the United States, then I can veto Congress.

I am not President.

Therefore, I cannot veto Congress.

The above argument is not valid, but would be if the first premise ended thus: "...and if I can veto Congress, then I am the U.S. President" (as is in fact true). More to the point, the validity of the new argument stems not from denying the antecedent, but denying the consequent.

See also

• Affirming the consequent
• Modus ponens
• Modus tollens
• Necessary and sufficient conditions
• To His Coy Mistress

References

1. ^ Turing, Alan (October 1950), "Computing Machinery and Intelligence", Mind LIX (236): 433–460, doi:10.1093/mind/LIX.236.433, ISSN 0026-4423, http://loebner.net/Prizef/TuringArticle.html, retrieved 2008-08-18 

External links

• FallacyFiles.org: Denying the Antecedent
• safalra.com: Denying The Antecedent

This logic-related article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.v · Categories: Propositional fallacies Logic Dichotomies Logic stubs Wikimedia Foundation. 2010. Игры ⚽ Нужно решить контрольную? Russian Blue Shadow of the Thin Man Look at other dictionaries: denying the antecedent — To argue invalidly that given that if p then q, and given not p, we can infer q . ‘If she is in Barbados she is in the Caribbean; she is not in Barbados, so she is not in the Caribbean.’ …   Philosophy dictionary fallacy of the antecedent — the logical fallacy of denying the antecedent : denial of the antecedent …   Useful english dictionary Antecedent (logic) — An antecedent is the first half of a hypothetical proposition.Examples:* If P, then Q.This is a standard logical formulation of a hypothetical proposition. In this case, the antecedent is P, and the consequent is Q.* If X is a man, then X is… …   Wikipedia The Incarnation —     The Incarnation     † Catholic Encyclopedia ► The Incarnation     I. The Fact of the Incarnation     (1) The Divine Person of Jesus Christ     A. Old Testament Proofs     B. New Testament Proofs     C. Witness of Tradition     (2) The Human… …   Catholic encyclopedia Fallacy of the undistributed middle — The fallacy of the undistributed middle is a logical fallacy that is committed when the middle term in a categorical syllogism isn t distributed. It is thus a syllogistic fallacy. Pattern The fallacy of the undistributed middle takes the… …   Wikipedia Affirming the consequent — Affirming the consequent, sometimes called converse error, is a formal fallacy, committed by reasoning in the form: If P, then Q. Q. Therefore, P. An argument of this form is invalid, i.e., the conclusion can be false even when statements 1 and 2 …   Wikipedia Begging the question — Bust of Aristotle, whose Prior Analytics contained an early discussion of this fallacy. Begging the question (or petitio principii, assuming the initial point ) is a type of logical fallacy in which the proposition to be proven is assumed… …   Wikipedia Herbert of Cherbury (Lord) and the Cambridge Platonists — Lord Herbert of Cherbury and the Cambridge Platonists Sarah Hutton The philosophy of Lord Herbert of Cherbury (1582/3–1648) and of the Cambridge Platonists exemplifies the continuities of seventeenth century thought with Renaissance philosophy.… …   History of philosophy Enlightenment (The Scottish) — The Scottish Enlightenment M.A.Stewart INTRODUCTION The term ‘Scottish Enlightenment’ is used to characterize a hundred years of intellectual and cultural endeavour that started around the second decade of the eighteenth century. Our knowledge of …   History of philosophy Inspiration of the Bible — • Covered in four sections, I. Belief in Inspired books; II. Nature of Inspiration; III. Extent of Inspiration; IV. Protestant Views on the Inspiration of the Bible Catholic Encyclopedia. Kevin Knight. 2006. Inspiration of the Bible      …   Catholic encyclopedia 18+ © Academic, 2000-2024 Contact us: Technical Support, Advertising Dictionaries export, created on PHP, Joomla, Drupal, WordPress, MODx. Mark and share Search through all dictionaries Translate… Search Internet Share the article and excerpts Direct link … Do a right-click on the link above and select “Copy Link”