The AskPhilosophers logo.

Logic

So I'm reading The Power of Logic, 4th edition. While on a section describing Modus Tollen it says that, Not A; If A, then B; So, Not B is an example of Modus Tollen. My question is how can that be if the conclusion of Modus Tollens is suppose to deny the consequent? Am i reading it wrong or just missing something? Keep in mine im still not beyond chapter 1.
Accepted:
February 9, 2015

Comments

Richard Heck
February 9, 2015 (changed February 9, 2015) Permalink

There is either a typo in the book you are reading, or else you reported its contents wrong. Modus tollens is: If A, then B; not-B; so not-A. The version you reported is fallacious. It's a version of the fallacy of asserting the consequent.

  • Log in to post comments
Source URL: https://askphilosophers.org/question/5795
© 2005-2025 AskPhilosophers.org