Talk:Existential fallacy
From Religions Wiki
Not sure I get it
From the examples given, it seems as though the fallacy lies in extrapolating from "if S exists, then it has property P" to "S exists" (because "all S are P" really means "any S that exist have property P").
Or, to put it another way, "all oranges are fruit" may be true, but it's not enough to conclude that oranges exist.
Does that sound right? --Arensb 14:40, 25 February 2011 (CST)