Denying the antecedent вЂ“ the consequent in an indicative conditional is claimed to be false because the antecedent is false if A, then B not A, therefore not B.

Affirming the consequent вЂ“ the antecedent in an indicative conditional is claimed to be true because the consequent is true if A, then B B, therefore A.

Affirming a disjunct вЂ“ concluding that one disjunct of a logical disjunction must be false because the other disjunct is true A or B A, therefore not B.

The following fallacies involve relations whose truth values are not guaranteed and therefore not guaranteed to yield true conclusions. For a compound proposition to be true, the truth values of its constituent parts must satisfy the relevant logical connectives that occur in it (most commonly:, ,, , ). ДЄ propositional fallacy is an error that concerns compound propositions. Masked-man fallacy (illicit substitution of identicals) вЂ“ the substitution of identical designators in a true statement can lead to a false one.Non-sequitur fallacy - where the conclusion does not logically follow the premise.Conjunction fallacy вЂ“ the assumption that an outcome simultaneously satisfying multiple conditions is more probable than an outcome satisfying a single one of them.Base rate fallacy вЂ“ making a probability judgment based on conditional probabilities, without taking into account the effect of prior probabilities.Argument from fallacy (also known as the fallacy fallacy) вЂ“ the assumption that, if a particular argument for a 'conclusion' is fallacious, then the conclusion by itself is false.Appeal to probability вЂ“ a statement that takes something for granted because it would probably be the case (or might be the case).All formal fallacies are types of non sequitur. A formal fallacy is an error in the argument's form.

Red herring fallacy in politics