How does the fallacy of accident misuse a general rule?

The fallacy of accident occurs when an argument applies a general rule to a specific case where special circumstances—or "accidents"—render that rule inapplicable.1

This error arises because the argument ignores the tacit restrictions, qualifications, or provisos that govern the general proposition, leading to an invalid application of the rule in the specific context at hand. Essentially, the fallacy treats a statement that holds true only under certain conditions as if it were an absolute, universal truth.1

A classic example is the observation that "men are capable of seeing." Applying this as a general rule to a specific case involving a blind man leads to the fallacious conclusion that "blind men are capable of seeing". By failing to account for the special circumstance of blindness, the argument misuses the general rule, demonstrating a failure to recognize the limitations inherent in the original premise.1