This fallacy has the following form:
- Person p1 makes conclusion c based of fallacious 'reasoning' from some premises.
- Person p2 shows that conclusion c was reached fallaciously.
- Therefore p2 claims that conclusion c is false.
This is a fallacy because a conclusion can be correct while the 'reasoning' was fallacious. It is the opposite that
is false, namely that it is deemed impossible to reach a wrong conclusion from correct premises and correct
Bill: "I want to simplify the fraction 64/16. I eliminate the sixes and get 4/1, that is 4."
Jane: "But you cannot simplify this way. This method is just not allowed. Therefore 64/16 is not equal to 4."