search

Commutation of Conditionals

(also known as: the fallacy of the consequent, converting a conditional)

Description: Switching the antecedent and the consequent in a logical argument.

Logical Form:

If P then Q.

Therefore, if Q then P.

Example #1:

If I have a PhD, then I am smart.

Therefore, if I am smart, then I have a PhD.

Explanation: There are many who could, rightly so, disagree with the first premise, but assuming that premise is true, does not guarantee that the conclusion is true.  There are many smart people without PhDs.

Example #2:

If I have herpes, then I have a strange rash.

Therefore, if I have a strange rash, then I have herpes.

Explanation: I am glad this is not true.  One can have non-herpes rashes.

Exception: If p=q, then it is necessarily true that q=p.

References:

Pickard, W. A., & Aristotle. (2006). On Sophistical Refutations. ReadHowYouWant.com, Limited.

Questions about this fallacy? Ask our community!

Like the Site? You'll Love the Book!

This book is a crash course, meant to catapult you into a world where you start to see things how they really are, not how you think they are.  The focus of this book is on logical fallacies, which loosely defined, are simply errors in reasoning.  With the reading of each page, you can make significant improvements in the way you reason and make decisions.

Get 20% off this book and all Bo's books*. Use the promotion code: websiteusers

* This is for the author's bookstore only. Applies to autographed hardcover, audiobook, and ebook.

Get the Book