If the legendary Bigfoot creature exists, then people will observe it. Jon and Jim saw a Bigfoot on a camping trip to the Pacific Northwest. Therefore, Bigfoot exists. Is this argument valid?
A) No, because it involves asserting the antecedent.
B) Yes, because it involves asserting the antecedent
C) Yes, because it involves asserting the consequent
D) No, because it involves asserting the consequent.

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

This argument commits the fallacy of asserting the consequent. It assumes that if Bigfoot exists, then people will observe it, and since Jon and Jim observed it, therefore Bigfoot must exist. However, there could be other explanations for what they saw, such as a misidentification of a known animal or a hoax. Therefore, the observation of something does not necessarily prove its existence as there could be alternative explanations.

If the Legendary Bigfoot Creature Exists, Then People Will Observe