Timeline for A phrase/word for a Logical Jump in argument
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
4 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 17, 2015 at 13:04 | comment | added | Jacob is on Codidact | @James indeed the second sense does not apply, but many words have multiple different, even conflicting, uses, so I do not consider that a point against "non sequitur". If Rio1210 is writing something remotely formal, it is even less likely to be misunderstood. A specific fallacy name may be preferable, but since all we have is a construed example we cannot know what the fallacy is (and this might be the wrong site for deciding that, anyways), or if it even has a name. Rather than list some potential matches, which you had already done, I chose to suggest a more generic option. | |
| Sep 17, 2015 at 11:10 | comment | added | James | From Oxford a non sequitur is "A conclusion or statement that does not logically follow from the previous argument or statement." Thus, ANY logical fallacy results in a non sequitur. According to your link a non sequitur is "a statement that is not connected in a logical or clear way to anything said before it". In this sense, it is used to describe an out-of-place statement as you said. The OP's situation meets the broad definition of non sequitur but not the second, commonly used definition. Therefore, it is better to refer to the OP's situation with a specific fallacy name. | |
| Sep 16, 2015 at 16:34 | review | First posts | |||
| Sep 16, 2015 at 16:34 | |||||
| Sep 16, 2015 at 16:33 | history | answered | Jacob is on Codidact | CC BY-SA 3.0 |