Historical Origins of Argumentum ad Consequentiam

Argumentation 13 (3):251-264 (1999)

Douglas Walton
University of Windsor
What are the historical origins of the argumentum ad consequentiam, the argument from consequences, sometimes featured as an informal fallacy in logic textbooks? As shown in this paper, knowledge of the argument can be traced back to Aristotle. And this type of argument shows a spotty history of recognition in logic texts and manuals over the centuries. But how it got into the modern logic textbooks as a fallacy remains somewhat obscure. Its modern genesis is traced to the logic text of James McCosh
Keywords fallacy  reasoning  consequences  Aristotle  Pascal  decision-making  deliberation  informal logic
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1023/A:1007779527544
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 40,131
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Slippery Slope Arguments.Douglas Walton - 1992 - Oxford University Press.
Logic Matters.P. T. Geach - 1972 - Blackwell.
O logice ontologického důkazu.Edward N. Zalta & Paul E. Oppenheimer - 2007 - Studia Neoaristotelica 4 (1):5-27.
Fallacies of Accident.David Botting - 2012 - Argumentation 26 (2):267-289.
Petitio Principii: What's Wrong?Andrea Iacona & Diego Marconi - 2005 - Facta Philosophica 7 (1):19-34.
Who is Afraid of Figure of Speech?Erik C. W. Krabbe - 1997 - Argumentation 12 (2):281-294.


Added to PP index

Total views
16 ( #490,710 of 2,237,181 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
2 ( #779,349 of 2,237,181 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes

Sign in to use this feature