search

Become an active member of our fallacy-discussing community (or just become a lurker!)

Denying a Conjunct

Description: A formal fallacy in which the first premise states that at least one of the two conjuncts (antecedent and consequent) is false and concludes that the other conjunct must be true.

Logical Forms:

Not both P and Q.

Not P.

Therefore, Q.

 

Not both P and Q.

Not Q.

Therefore, P.

Example #1:

I am not both a moron and an idiot.

I am not a moron.

Therefore, I am an idiot.

Explanation:  I might be an idiot, but the truth of both premises does not guarantee that I am; therefore, this argument is invalid -- technically, the form of this formal argument is invalid.  Being “not both” a moron and an idiot, only means that if I am not one of the two, I am simply not one of the two -- we cannot logically conclude that I am the other.

Example #2:

I am not both a Christian and a Satanist.

I am not a Satanist.

Therefore, I am a Christian.

Explanation:  The truth of both premises does not guarantee that I am a Christian; therefore, this argument is invalid -- the form of this formal argument is invalid.  Being “not both” a Satanist and a Christian, only means that if I am not one of the two, I am simply not one of the two -- we cannot logically conclude that I am the other.

Exception: No exceptions.

Fun Fact: Atheists don’t eat babies.

References:

Kiersky, J. H., & Caste, N. J. (1995). Thinking Critically: Techniques for Logical Reasoning. West Publishing Company.

Questions about this fallacy? Ask our community!

Master the "Rules of Reason" for Making and Evaluating Claims

Claims are constantly being made, many of which are confusing, ambiguous, too general to be of value, exaggerated, unfalsifiable, and suggest a dichotomy when no such dichotomy exists. Good critical thinking requires a thorough understanding of the claim before attempting to determine its veracity. Good communication requires the ability to make clear, precise, explicit claims, or “strong” claims. The rules of reason in this book provide the framework for obtaining this understanding and ability.

This book / online course is about the the eleven rules of reason for making and evaluating claims. Each covered in detail in the book

Take the Online Course