Exclusive Premises

From EvoWiki

This page is part of the EvoWiki encyclopedia of fallacies. Browse: A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z

Contents 1 Synonyms 2 Explanation 2.1 Example 3 Category 4 External Links 5 Examples in creationist arguments

Synonyms

• Fallacy of exclusive premises
• Two negative premises

Explanation

You commit this fallacy if you use only negative syllogisms (i.e. exclusive premises) to draw a conclusion.

1. No A are B
2. No C are A
3. Thus, No C are B.

Example

1. Plants are not animals.
2. Humans are not plants.
3. Therefore, humans are not animals.

This argument is fallacious because both premises are exclusive. If the first premise is a negative syllogism, the other must be a positive: If it was shown that humans are plants, only then would the conclusion be logical.

Category

• Syllogistic Fallacy

External Links

• Fallacy Files [1]
• Stephen Downes [2]
• Wikipedia [3]

Examples in creationist arguments