Main Page | See live article | Alphabetical index

Denying the antecedent

Denying the antecedent is a type of logical fallacy.

Suppose in an argument one were to deny the "if" part of a conditional (the antecedent) first, and conclude with the denial of "then" part (the consequent).

If P, then Q.
P is false.
Therefore, Q is false.

This argument form has the name denying the antecedent, because in arguing this way one does indeed deny the antecedent in the second premise. This is a logical fallacy. If we argue this way, we make a mistake. One can see this with an example:
If there is fire here, then there is oxygen here. (Since oxygen is required for fire.)
There is no fire here.
Therefore, there is no oxygen here.

See also: modus ponens, modus tollens, affirming the consequent.