Which fallacy involves accepting or rejecting a claim based on its consequences?

The Appeal to Consequences Fallacy is characterized by the reasoning that a claim must be true or false based solely on the desirability or undesirability of its consequences. This fallacy occurs when someone evaluates the truth of a proposition based on the potential outcomes, rather than on evidence or logical argumentation. For example, saying that a belief is false simply because its acceptance would lead to negative consequences demonstrates this fallacy.

In contrast to the other options, which involve different logical errors, the Appeal to Consequences focuses specifically on the effects of accepting or rejecting a claim rather than the merits of the claim itself. The fallacy of equivocation involves ambiguous language, the appeal to popularity focuses on the popularity of a claim as evidence for its truth, and the fallacy of ignorance asserts that a claim is true simply because it has not been proven false or vice versa. Each of these represents a different way in which logical reasoning can be improperly applied, but the Appeal to Consequences specifically highlights the flawed reliance on the outcomes of a belief as evidence for its validity.