Affirmative conclusion from a negative premise
Occurs when a syllogism tries to draw a positive conclusion even though one of the premises is negative in a way that cannot support that conclusion.
Logical Fallacies
A practical logical-fallacies reference with clear explanations, usable examples, and teaching tools.
Family
The argument fails because its internal structure does not validly carry the premises to the conclusion.
Occurs when a syllogism tries to draw a positive conclusion even though one of the premises is negative in a way that cannot support that conclusion.
Occurs when someone treats an ordinary 'or' as if it were exclusive and concludes that one option must be false because the other is true.
Occurs when someone reasons from 'if A, then B' and then wrongly infers A merely because B is observed.
Occurs when an argument quietly assumes the very point it is supposed to prove, so the conclusion is built into the premises.
Occurs when someone reasons from 'if A, then B' and then wrongly infers 'not B' merely because A is absent.
Occurs when two negative premises are used in a syllogism even though they fail to establish the positive link the conclusion requires.
Occurs when a conclusion assumes that something exists even though the premises never established that any such thing exists.
Occurs when a syllogism seems to use three terms but actually uses four because one term shifts meaning halfway through the argument.
Occurs when a syllogism distributes the major term in the conclusion even though the major premise never distributed it there.
Occurs when two names or descriptions refer to the same thing, but a belief or knowledge context blocks simple substitution and the argument ignores that.
Occurs when an argument becomes so internally tangled that its pieces no longer form a coherent chain from premise to conclusion even though it sounds intricate.
Occurs when two things are linked to the same broader category and the argument wrongly infers that one of them must therefore be the other.