What type of fallacy occurs when the truth of the conclusion is based on the potential negative outcomes?

The fallacy that occurs when the truth of the conclusion is based on potential negative outcomes is known as the appeal to consequences. This type of reasoning suggests that a statement must be true or false based on the consequences that would result from its acceptance or rejection.

For example, if someone argues that a particular belief must be true because not believing it could lead to dire consequences (like social disorder or personal harm), they are employing this fallacy. The validity of a claim should be based on evidence and logical reasoning rather than the outcomes it might produce.

Although other fallacies exist, such as the appeal to force, which relies on intimidation to accept a conclusion, or the appeal to authority, which suggests that something must be true because an authority figure believes it, none of them specifically involve assessing the truth based on potential negative outcomes in the way that the appeal to consequences does. Similarly, the fallacy of equivocation occurs when a term with multiple meanings is used ambiguously in an argument. In contrast, the appeal to consequences is directly focused on the impact of accepting a particular conclusion.