There is no RationalWiki without you. We are a small non-profit with no staff – we are hundreds of volunteers who document pseudoscience and crankery around the world every day. We will never allow ads because we must remain independent. We cannot rely on big donors with corresponding big agendas. We are not the largest website around, but we believe we play an important role in defending truth and objectivity. If everyone who saw this today donated $5, we would meet our goal for 2021. |
Fighting pseudoscience isn't free. We are 100% user-supported! Help and donate $5, $20 or whatever you can today with ! |
Modus tollens
Cogito ergo sum Logic and rhetoric |
Key articles |
General logic |
Bad logic |
Modus tollens ("mode of taking") is a logical argument, or rule of inference. (Compare with modus ponens, or "mode of putting.") It is also known as indirect proof or proof by contrapositive, and is a valid form of argument in formal logic.^{[1]}
As an argument[edit]
A modus tollens argument has the following form:
- P1: If X, then Y. (i. e. Either not X or Y)
- P2: Not Y.
- C: Therefore, not X.
For example:
- P1: If it is raining, the ground is wet. (i. e. It is not raining or the ground is wet.)
- P2: The ground is not wet.
- C: Therefore, it is not raining.
The contrapositive of "if X then Y" is "if not Y then not X"; if a proposition is true, then so is its contrapositive.^{[2]}
As a rule of inference[edit]
In propositional logic:
In first-order logic:
Denying the antecedent[edit]
It can be contrasted with the fallacy of denying the antecedent, for instance (using the above example) "it is not raining, therefore the ground is not wet" (obviously untrue if you're standing in a lake). Denying the antecedent asserts not-X rather than not-Y.
See also[edit]
References[edit]
- ↑ Modus Tollens, Jordan Bell, Wolfram Mathworld
- ↑ Converse and Contrapositive, CS381 Discrete Structures/Discrete Mathematics Web Course Material, Old Dominion University