Accident (fallacy)

The fallacy of accident (also called destroying the exception or a dicto simpliciter ad dictum
secundum quid) is an informal fallacy and a deduct ively valid but unsound argument occurring in a
st at ist ical syllogism (an argument based on a generalizat ion) when an except ion t o a rule of
t humb[1] is ignored. It is one of t he t hirt een fallacies originally ident ified by Arist ot le in Sophistical
Refutations. The fallacy occurs when one at t empt s t o apply a general rule t o an irrelevant
sit uat ion.

For example:

Cutting people with knives is a crime. →

Surgeons cut people with knives. →

Surgeons are criminals.

This fallacy may occur when limit ed generalizat ions ("some; somet imes and somewhere") are
mixed wit h A-t ype cat egorical st at ement s ("all; always and everywhere"), oft en when no
quant ifiers like "some" or "many" or qualifiers such as "rarely" are used t o mark off what is or may
be except ed in t he generalizat ion.

Relat ed induct ive fallacies include overwhelming except ions and hast y generalizat ions. See
fault y generalizat ion.

The opposing kind of dicto simpliciter fallacy is t he converse accident .

Notes

1. "The Fallacy of Accident" (http://fallacyfiles.org/accident.html) . The Fallacy Files.

Reference list

S. Morris Engel (1999). With Good Reason: An Introduction to Informal Fallacies (ht t ps://books.
google.com/books?id=vpcvGwAACAAJ) . Bedford/St . Mart in's. ISBN 0312157584. Ret rieved
2013-02-17.

St u This logic-related article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it (https://en.wikip
b icon edia.org/w/index.php?title=Accident_(fallacy)&action=edit) .

Retrieved from
"https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?
title=Accident_(fallacy)&oldid=1008027553"

Last edited 1 year ago by Roger.M.Williams