Yes, logic IS the art of going wrong with confidence.

In a logical argument, if the conclusion makes sense with the premises, it is said to be valid. If an argument is valid, it is hard to argue against. Validity does not reflect truthfulness, or factual data, but if premises go through steps to prove that a conclusion is valid, flaws in the argument cannot be found. How would one argue against an argument which has logical proof? Where is THEIR logical proof? Logical proofs are so hard to contradict because the premises flow together in a reasonable and LOGICAL order. By using deductive reasoning, all valid conclusions seem to make sense. The conclusions are solid.

The flaw in deductive reasoning comes when the conclusion is valid but not true. Statements that are not true are accepted under deductive reasoning, and are nearly impossible to disprove without inductive reasoning. This is exactly what going wrong with confidence is. Being incorrect, but confident. The confidence is the validity of the argument. The flaw of deductive reasoning is that it allows one to go wrong with confidence, as the quote says.