Final answer:
The specific term for a fallacy of making an inverse inference is not provided, but it could be related to an invalid argument where an incorrect conclusion is drawn despite having true premises. Affirming the consequent is an example of such a fallacy.
Step-by-step explanation:
The term for the fallacy of making an inverse inference is not directly specified in the provided material, but related fallacies can include those of relevance, weak induction, unwarranted assumption, and diversion. A particular case that might resemble an inverse inference could be a sort of invalid argument, where the structure of the argument doesn't guarantee the truth of the conclusion. In such an invalid inference, even if the premises are true, the conclusion can be false, not necessarily because it must be, but because the structure does not support it.
For example, the fallacy known as "affirming the consequent" is a relevant type of invalid inference, where one incorrectly infers the truth of the antecedent from the truth of the consequent in a conditional statement. While not explicitly categorized as an inverse inference, it conveys the essence of incorrectly deducing something in an argument's structure. Identifying such fallacies entails careful examination of the argument's validity and the relevance and strength of its premises.