Difference between revisions of "Non sequitur"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Laliluleilo (talk | contribs) |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | [[Image:X_mark.jpg|200px|right]] | + | {{stub}}[[Image:X_mark.jpg|200px|right]] |
[[Non sequitur]] ([[Latin]], "It does not follow") is any argument that moves from a premise to a conclusion with insufficient or no connection between the two. | [[Non sequitur]] ([[Latin]], "It does not follow") is any argument that moves from a premise to a conclusion with insufficient or no connection between the two. | ||
Revision as of 05:41, April 1, 2007
Non sequitur (Latin, "It does not follow") is any argument that moves from a premise to a conclusion with insufficient or no connection between the two.
The most common example of non sequitur is any attempt to infer causation from correlation alone. An argument of causality--that is, that X caused Y--is always subject to weakening if one can show that:
- Y could have occurred with or without X.
- Another event, Z, actually caused Y.
- Y caused X rather than X causing Y.
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.
Reference
See Also
| Template:Fallacy |
| Use the {{fallacy|Non sequitur}} template to insert this warning on a page containing a Non sequitur. The template links the warning label to this page. |