48
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 17:
Line 17: + + + +
new section
The usual way to weaken a ''non sequitur'' is simply to show that two facts, that might happen to correlate, are in fact not mutually relevant. Of course, showing that the chain of implication is reversed--meaning that the first named fact actually follows from the second, rather than the second from the first--will cast even more serious doubt on the argument.
The usual way to weaken a ''non sequitur'' is simply to show that two facts, that might happen to correlate, are in fact not mutually relevant. Of course, showing that the chain of implication is reversed--meaning that the first named fact actually follows from the second, rather than the second from the first--will cast even more serious doubt on the argument.
== Liberal non sequiturs ==
Most arguments by liberals invoke some sort of non sequitor; therefore, attempting to systematically catalog all of them would be a monumental and impractical task. The following are a few select examples to demonstrate such arguments and why they fail.
== References ==
== References ==