Editing Deductive reasoning (section)

=== Fallacies ===
Various formal fallacies have been described. They are invalid forms of deductive reasoning.<ref name="IEPFallacies">{{Cite encyclopedia |title=Fallacies |encyclopedia=Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy |url=https://iep.utm.edu/fallacy/ |access-date=12 March 2022 |last1=Dowden |first1=Bradley}}</ref><ref name="Stump">{{Cite encyclopedia |title=Fallacy, Logical |encyclopedia=New Dictionary of the History of Ideas |url=https://www.encyclopedia.com/history/dictionaries-thesauruses-pictures-and-press-releases/fallacy-logical |last1=Stump |first1=David J.}}</ref> An additional aspect of them is that they appear to be valid on some occasions or on the first impression. They may thereby seduce people into accepting and committing them.<ref>{{Cite encyclopedia |year=2020 |title=Fallacies |encyclopedia=The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |publisher=Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University |url=https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/fallacies/ |access-date=12 March 2022 |last1=Hansen |first1=Hans}}</ref> One type of formal fallacy is [[affirming the consequent]], as in "if John is a bachelor, then he is male; John is male; therefore, John is a bachelor".<ref>{{Cite encyclopedia |title=Expert thinking and novice thinking: Deduction |encyclopedia=Encyclopædia Britannica |url=https://www.britannica.com/topic/thought/Expert-thinking-and-novice-thinking |access-date=12 March 2022}}</ref> This is similar to the valid rule of inference named [[modus ponens]], but the second premise and the conclusion are switched around, which is why it is invalid. A similar formal fallacy is [[denying the antecedent]], as in "if Othello is a bachelor, then he is male; Othello is not a bachelor; therefore, Othello is not male".<ref name="BritannicaThought">{{Cite encyclopedia |title=Thought |encyclopedia=Encyclopædia Britannica |url=https://www.britannica.com/topic/thought |access-date=14 October 2021}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last=Stone |first=Mark A. |year=2012 |title=Denying the Antecedent: Its Effective Use in Argumentation |url=https://philpapers.org/rec/STODTA |journal=Informal Logic |volume=32 |issue=3 |pages=327–356 |doi=10.22329/il.v32i3.3681 |doi-access=free}}</ref> This is similar to the valid rule of inference called [[modus tollens]], the difference being that the second premise and the conclusion are switched around. Other formal fallacies include [[affirming a disjunct]], [[denying a conjunct]], and the [[fallacy of the undistributed middle]]. All of them have in common that the truth of their premises does not ensure the truth of their conclusion. But it may still happen by coincidence that both the premises and the conclusion of formal fallacies are true.<ref name="IEPFallacies" /><ref name="Stump" />