Jump to content

Converse accident

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Thefallacyofconverse accident(also calledreverse accident,destroying the exception,ora dicto secundum quid ad dictum simpliciter) is aninformal fallacythat can occur in astatistical syllogism(an argument based on ageneralization), when a rule that applies only to an exceptional case is wrongly applied to all cases in general.

Example[edit]

  1. TheTunguska explosionhappened in Siberia.
  2. Magnitogorsk Iron and Steel Worksis in Siberia.
  3. This is a bad company to invest in because it's just going to be destroyed by a meteorite.

"If we allow people withglaucomato usemedical marijuana,then everyone should be allowed to use marijuana. "

  1. People with glaucoma usemarijuana.
  2. People withglaucomashould be allowed to choose what substances they use.
  3. Therefore, all people who use marijuana should be allowed to choose what substances they use.

Related fallacies[edit]

This fallacy is similar to theslippery slope,where the opposition claims that if a restricted action under debate is allowed, such as allowing people with glaucoma to use medical marijuana, then the action will by stages become acceptable in general, such as eventually everyone being allowed to use marijuana. The two arguments imply there is no difference between the exception and the rule, and in fact fallacious slippery slope arguments often use the converse accident to the contrary as the basis for the argument. However, a key difference between the two is the point and position being argued. The above argument using converse accident is an argumentforfull legal use of marijuana given that glaucoma patients use it. The argument based on the slippery slope arguesagainstmedicinal use of marijuana because it will lead to full use.

Theinductiveversion of this fallacy is calledhasty generalization.(Seefaulty generalization.) The opposing kind ofdicto simpliciterisaccident.

External links[edit]