Say you're having a conversation with somebody. You keep explaining that you're making arrangements for tomorrow.

Then they make the comment "why you would do it for anybody else," but this is not based on any facts or any related circumstances.

So the comment is made as if this is something that happens all the time, when it's not, and there are no facts to back up the comment.

New contributor
RaeRaeBabi is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering. Check out our Code of Conduct.

1 Answer 1


They have introduced a red herring into the conversation.

wikipedia Red herring:
A red herring is something that misleads or distracts from a relevant or important question

Cambridge has

Red herring:
a fact, idea, or subject that takes people's attention away from the central point being considered

If you like to use a Latinism, you may say that they have made a non sequitur

Merriam Webster
non sequitur:
a statement (such as a response) that does not follow logically from or is not clearly related to anything previously said
We were talking about the new restaurant when she threw in some non sequitur about her dog.

The person may also be facile (in its insulting sense rather than in the sense of doing things easily and with little effort)

Ignoring the true complexities of an issue; superficial

If the complexities are large, ignoring them is almost the same as ignoring the whole issue.

  • What does ignoring complexity have to do with making an assertion that's not true? The statement he's talking about is when the person claims that you would explain again for someone else, but not him.
    – Barmar
    Aug 4 at 16:51
  • Sly comments can be glib, but the big lie is BS. Aug 4 at 16:58
  • @Barmar You may be right, so I have now put facile at the end. I took a relaxed attitude that ignoring complexities of an issue is almost synonymous with ignoring the issue. For who can quantify complexities? They may be very small or very large. If very large, ignoring them is tantamount to ignoring all the issue.
    – Anton
    Aug 4 at 17:43
  • 1
    They're not ignoring issues, they're just making a statement without any justification. They're making an assumption.
    – Barmar
    Aug 4 at 18:43
  • @Barmar I hesitate to contradict you but they are ignoring the preceding part of the conversation , so they are making a statement that (to use the PO's text) is not "based on facts (of the previous part of the conversation) or related circumstances (the focus of the conversation)"
    – Anton
    Aug 4 at 21:10

Your Answer

RaeRaeBabi is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.