 Reasoning from exclusive or normic cp-laws has an important logical feature: the inferences are in contrast to deductively valid arguments not monotonic. An inference is monotonic iff adding arbitrary new premises to a valid argument preserves its validity. But the inference from an exclusive cp-law of the form “exclusively cp, \(A\)s are \(B\)s” and a singular statement \(A(d)\) (for “\(d\) is an \(A\)”) to a conclusion \(B(d)\) is no longer correct if \(d\) is known to instantiate a disturbing factor \(D\) which blocks the nomic connection between \(A\) and \(B\). For instance, the exclusive cp-law may state that if something is a bird (\(A\)), then it normally can fly (\(B\)), and \(D\) may assert that the given bird-instance has broken wings.