“If you don’t go to the doctor tomorrow, you won’t get better. You will go to the doctor tomorrow. So, you will get better.”

What kind of fallacy does this argument fall under? I have a suspicion it’s one of the formal fallacies; however, the negations in the first premise throw me off.

  • False dilemma? there's another choice.. don't go to the doctors but still get better. Or even.. go.. but still.dont get better.
    – Richard
    Feb 12, 2019 at 3:58

1 Answer 1


It's denying the antecedent. The premise 'if P then Q' only tells you what follows from P. It doesn't tell you what follows from not-P. So you cannot infer not-Q from that.

In this case, P = you won't go to the doctor tomorrow; Q = you won't get better. Note that the conclusion can be false even if the two premises are true: perhaps you will never get better -- that's consistent with the assumptions. If the conclusion can be false when the premises are true the argument is invalid.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.