Affirmation of the consequent is a formal fallacy that reverses an implication. If A implies B, we cannot conclude that B implies A.
Example
“If a politician is corrupt, they hide accounts.
This politician hid accounts, therefore they are corrupt.”
(There may be other causes or contexts for hiding accounts.)
Applied example (political)
“If there is a crisis, the dollar rises. The dollar rose, therefore there is a crisis.” (The consequence can have other causes.)
Applied example (mystical)
“If someone is aligned, they feel peace. They feel peace, therefore they are aligned.” (Peace can have other explanations.)
Why it is fallacious
- The consequence can have multiple causes.
- It confuses a sufficient condition with a necessary one.
- It ignores alternative explanations.
How to spot it
- Typical form: “If A then B. B, therefore A”.
- A single-factor explanation for a complex outcome.
- Using an indicator as conclusive proof.
How to respond
- Offer other plausible causes of B.
- Ask for evidence that specifically links A to B.
- Remind that “may cause” is not “the only cause”.