Accident fallacy

From Iron Chariots Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
For more information, see the Wikipedia article:

The Accident fallacy, or a dicto simpliciter ad dictum secundum quid, is when generalizations are applied to circumstances when they are otherwise flukes or exceptions. The broader the generalization, the weaker it tends to be, and is more prone to this type of fallacy. In other words, it is insisting that the rule of thumb applies even to the exceptions.


  • Example 1
  1. Cutting people is criminal
  2. Surgeons cut people
  3. Surgeons are criminals
  • Example 2
  1. God gives people meaning and purpose
  2. Atheists have meaning and purpose
  3. They believe in God, but are in denial

Converse Accident Fallacy

The Converse accident fallacy is similar to the accident fallacy, except, in reverse. The exception is used to justify a generalization.

  • Example 1
  1. Speeding on the roads is illegal
  2. The police can legally speed in an emergency
  3. I can legally speed if it's an emergency
  • Example 2
  1. God did evil things in pursuit of doing good, and still be good
  2. I'm trying to do good
  3. I can do evil things while still being good

v · d Logical fallacies
v · d Formal fallacies
v · d Faulty generalisations
Distribution fallacies   Fallacy of composition · Fallacy of division
Ontological fallacies   Fallacy of reification · Pathetic fallacy · Loki's Wager
v · d False relevance
Personal tools
wiki navigation