stated definition of or in propositional logic to be inclusive. An example of affirming a disjunct would be: I am at home or I am in the city. I am at home. Therefore, I am not in the city. While the conclusion may be true, it does not follow from the premise. For all the reader knows, the declarant of the statement very well could be in both the city and their home, in which case the premises would be true but the conclusion false. This argument is still a fallacy even if the conclusion is true. *Note that this is only a logical fallacy when the word "or" is in its inclusive form. If the two possibilities in question are mutually exclusive, this is not a logical fallacy. For example, I am either at home or I am in the city. (but not both) I am at home. Therefore, I am not in the city. Denying a conjunct Denying a conjunct is a fallacy when in the following form: It is not the case that A and B are both true. B is not true. Therefore, A is true. The conclusion does not follow from the premise as it could be the case that A and B are both false. An example of denying a conjunct would be: I cannot be both at home and in the city. I am not at home. Therefore, I am in the city. While the conclusion may be true, it does not follow from the premise. For all the reader knows, the declarant of the statement very well could neither be at home nor in the city, in which case the premise would be true but the conclusion false. This argument is still a fallacy even if the conclusion is true. Illicit commutativity Illicit commutativity is a fallacy when in the following form: If A is the case, then B is the case. Therefore, if B is the case, then A is the case. The conclusion does not follow from the premise as unlike other logical connectives, the implies operator is one-way only. "P and Q" is the same as "Q and P", but "P implies Q" is not the same as "Q implies P". An example of this fallacy is as follows: If it is raining, then I have my umbrella. If I have my umbrella, then it is raining. While this