A

logical fallacy where two unrelated

points are combined and treated as one

proposition, where if the proposition is false both points are considered false. It is an invalid use of the

logical and operator. In formal logic, "not(A and B) implies (not A) and (not B)".

An example: "Do you hate children and dogs". You could hate children and love dogs, or vice versa, but the negative answer would assume you like both.

To prove the use of complex question, show that the proposition contains two distinct points, where one's truth value is unrelated to the other's.

Most of the examples given above are actually False Premise. For example, "Have you stopped beating your wife?" assumes that you beat your wife. BTW, the answer is mu ;)

Note that "not(A and B) implies (not A) or (not B)" is not a logical fallacy (see DeMorgan's Law). In conversation, you must often be clear that your negative answer is interpreted properly.