Which fallacy arises when a conclusion follows two negative premises?

• A. No conclusion follows from two negative premises
• B. Exclusive Premises
• C. Undistributed Middle
• D. Illicit Major

Answer: (B)

When both premises are negative, a valid conclusion about the relationship between the subject term and the predicate term cannot be drawn. In traditional syllogistic, a valid argument needs a link through a term that is distributed in a way that connects the two sides; two negative premises don’t provide that link, so any attempted conclusion would be fallacious. This situation is known as Exclusive Premises. For example, from No S are P and No P are M, trying to conclude No S are M isn’t justified because S and M could still share members in ways the premises don’t constrain. The other options involve different distribution issues (for instance, when the middle term is not distributed, or when the major term is distributed in the conclusion but not in the major premise), but they don’t describe the specific issue of deriving a conclusion from two negative premises.