A common flaw in reasoning is to apply correct logic to a faulty '''premise''', as in "if embryonic [[stem cell]] research will save lives, then we should support it!" The '''premise''' of embryonic [[stem cell]] research saving lives is unproven and unjustified as a supposition, as all research has shown it to be essentially worthless. Note that statements of this sort ("if A, then B") require a correct premise, since no conclusions can be drawn from a false one - only propositions that take the more exclusive form of "only if A, then B" directly couple the truth value of the [[consequent]] to that of the [[antecedent]] in order to present a dichotomous choice. | A common flaw in reasoning is to apply correct logic to a faulty '''premise''', as in "if embryonic [[stem cell]] research will save lives, then we should support it!" The '''premise''' of embryonic [[stem cell]] research saving lives is unproven and unjustified as a supposition, as all research has shown it to be essentially worthless. Note that statements of this sort ("if A, then B") require a correct premise, since no conclusions can be drawn from a false one - only propositions that take the more exclusive form of "only if A, then B" directly couple the truth value of the [[consequent]] to that of the [[antecedent]] in order to present a dichotomous choice. |