Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 163 views

    Non Sequitur (Logic) : 1 in Everyday Speech

    Uploaded by

    Roxane Mawuntu
    1. A non sequitur is a logical fallacy where the conclusion does not follow from the premises. There are several types of non sequiturs, including affirming the consequent, denying the antecedent, and the fallacy of the undistributed middle. 2. In everyday speech, a non sequitur refers to a statement where the final part is unrelated to the first part, or a response that is unrelated to the original statement. 3. Examples of different types of non sequiturs include affirming a disjunct, denying a conjunct, and the fallacy of the undistributed middle. These arguments are fallacious because the conclusion does not logically follow from

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Non Sequitur (Logic) : 1 in Everyday Speech

    Uploaded by

    Roxane Mawuntu
    163 views4 pages
    1. A non sequitur is a logical fallacy where the conclusion does not follow from the premises. There are several types of non sequiturs, including affirming the consequent, denying the antecedent, and the fallacy of the undistributed middle. 2. In everyday speech, a non sequitur refers to a statement where the final part is unrelated to the first part, or a response that is unrelated to the original statement. 3. Examples of different types of non sequiturs include affirming a disjunct, denying a conjunct, and the fallacy of the undistributed middle. These arguments are fallacious because the conclusion does not logically follow from

    Original Description:

    Non sequitur

    Original Title

    Non Sequitur (Logic)

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1. A non sequitur is a logical fallacy where the conclusion does not follow from the premises. There are several types of non sequiturs, including affirming the consequent, denying the antecedent, and the fallacy of the undistributed middle. 2. In everyday speech, a non sequitur refers to a statement where the final part is unrelated to the first part, or a response that is unrelated to the original statement. 3. Examples of different types of non sequiturs include affirming a disjunct, denying a conjunct, and the fallacy of the undistributed middle. These arguments are fallacious because the conclusion does not logically follow from

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    163 views4 pages

    Non Sequitur (Logic) : 1 in Everyday Speech

    Uploaded by

    Roxane Mawuntu
    1. A non sequitur is a logical fallacy where the conclusion does not follow from the premises. There are several types of non sequiturs, including affirming the consequent, denying the antecedent, and the fallacy of the undistributed middle. 2. In everyday speech, a non sequitur refers to a statement where the final part is unrelated to the first part, or a response that is unrelated to the original statement. 3. Examples of different types of non sequiturs include affirming a disjunct, denying a conjunct, and the fallacy of the undistributed middle. These arguments are fallacious because the conclusion does not logically follow from

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 4

    Non sequitur (logic)

    Not to be confused with Non sequitur (literary device).

    The fallacy of the undistributed middle takes the following form:

    Non sequitur (Latin for it does not follow), in formal


    logic, is an argument in which its conclusion does not
    follow from its premises.[1] In a non sequitur, the conclusion could be either true or false, but the argument is
    fallacious because there is a disconnection between the
    premise and the conclusion. All invalid arguments are
    special cases of non sequitur. The term has special applicability in law, having a formal legal denition. Many
    types of known non sequitur argument forms have been
    classied into many types of logical fallacies.

    1. All Zs are Bs.


    2. Y is a B.
    3. Therefore, Y is a Z.
    It may or may not be the case that all Zs are Bs, but
    in either case it is irrelevant to the conclusion. What is
    relevant to the conclusion is whether it is true that all Bs
    are Zs, which is ignored in the argument.
    An example can be given as follows, where B=humans,
    Y=Mary and Z=men:

    In everyday speech

    1. All men are humans.

    Main article: Non sequitur (literary device)


    See also: Derailment (thought disorder)

    2. Mary is human.

    3. Therefore, Mary is a man.


    In everyday speech, a non sequitur is a statement in which
    the nal part is totally unrelated to the rst part, for ex- Note that if the terms (Z and B) were swapped around in
    ample:
    the rst co-premise then it would no longer be a fallacy,
    although it could still be unsound.
    Life is life and fun is fun, but its all so
    quiet when the goldsh die.
    West with the Night, Beryl Markham[2]
    3 Arming the consequent
    Main article: Arming the consequent

    It can also refer to a response that is totally unrelated to


    the original statement or question:

    Any argument that takes the following form is a non sequitur

    Mary: I wonder how Mrs. Knowles nextdoor neighbour is doing.


    Jim: Did you hear that the convenience
    store two blocks over got robbed last night?
    Thieves got away with a small fortune.[3]

    1. If A is true, then B is true.


    2. B is true.
    3. Therefore, A is true.

    Fallacy of the undistributed middle

    Even if the premises and conclusion are all true, the conclusion is not a necessary consequence of the premises.
    This sort of non sequitur is also called arming the consequent.

    Main article: Fallacy of the undistributed middle

    An example of arming the consequent would be:

    The fallacy of the undistributed middle is a fallacy that


    is committed when the middle term in a categorical syllogism is not distributed. It is thus a syllogistic fallacy.
    More specically it is also a form of non sequitur.

    1. If Jackson is a human (A), then Jackson is a mammal. (B)


    2. Jackson is a mammal. (B)
    1

    6
    3. Therefore, Jackson is a human. (A)

    While the conclusion may be true, it does not follow from


    the premises:
    1. Humans are mammals
    2. Jackson is a mammal
    3. Therefore, Jackson is a human

    DENYING A CONJUNCT

    1. A is true or B is true.
    2. B is true.
    3. Therefore, A is not true.*
    The conclusion does not follow from the premises as it
    could be the case that A and B are both true. This fallacy stems from the stated denition of or in propositional
    logic to be inclusive.
    An example of arming a disjunct would be:

    The truth of the conclusion is independent of the truth of


    its premises - it is a 'non sequitur'.
    Arming the consequent is essentially the same as the
    fallacy of the undistributed middle, but using propositions
    rather than set membership.

    Denying the antecedent

    Main article: Denying the antecedent


    Another common non sequitur is this:
    1. If A is true, then B is true.
    2. A is false.

    1. I am at home or I am in the city.


    2. I am at home.
    3. Therefore, I am not in the city.
    While the conclusion may be true, it does not follow from
    the premises. For all the reader knows, the declarant of
    the statement very well could be in both the city and their
    home, in which case the premises would be true but the
    conclusion false. This argument is still a fallacy even if
    the conclusion is true.
    Note that this is only a logical fallacy when the word
    or is in its inclusive form. If the two possibilities in
    question are mutually exclusive, this is not a logical
    fallacy. For example

    3. Therefore, B is false.
    1. I am either at home or I am in the city.
    While B can indeed be false, this cannot be linked to
    the premise since the statement is a non sequitur. This
    is called denying the antecedent.

    2. I am at home.
    3. Therefore, I am not in the city.

    An example of denying the antecedent would be:


    1. If I am Japanese, then I am Asian.

    6 Denying a conjunct

    2. I am not Japanese.

    Main article: Denying a conjunct

    3. Therefore, I am not Asian.


    Denying a conjunct is a fallacy when in the following
    While the conclusion may be true, it does not follow from form:
    the premises. For all the reader knows, the declarant of
    1. It is not the case that both A is true and B is true.
    the statement could be Asian, but for example Chinese, in
    which case the premises would be true but the conclusion
    2. B is not true.
    false. This argument is still a fallacy even if the conclusion
    is true.
    3. Therefore, A is true.

    Arming a disjunct

    Main article: Arming a disjunct


    Arming a disjunct is a fallacy when in the following
    form:

    The conclusion does not follow from the premises as it


    could be the case that A and B are both false.
    An example of denying a conjunct would be:
    1. I cannot be both at home and in the city.
    2. I am not at home.

    3
    3. Therefore, I am in the city.
    While the conclusion may be true, it does not follow from
    the premises. For all the reader knows, the declarant of
    the statement very well could neither be at home nor in
    the city, in which case the premises would be true but the
    conclusion false. This argument is still a fallacy even if
    the conclusion is true.

    See also
    Ignoratio elenchi
    Modus tollens
    Modus ponens
    Post hoc ergo propter hoc
    Regression fallacy
    Fallacy of many questions

    References

    [1] Barker, Stephen F. (2003) [1965]. Chapter 6: Fallacies. The Elements of Logic (Sixth ed.). New York, NY:
    McGraw-Hill. pp. 160169. ISBN 0-07-283235-5.
    [2] Quoted in Hindes, Steve (2005). Think for Yourself!: an
    Essay on Cutting through the Babble, the Bias, and the
    Hype. Fulcrum Publishing. p. 86. ISBN 1-55591-539-6.
    Retrieved 2011-10-04.
    [3] Board, Prudy Taylor (2003). 101 Tips on Writing and Selling Your First Novel. iUniverse. p. 121. ISBN 0-59529313-1. Retrieved 2011-10-04.

    9 TEXT AND IMAGE SOURCES, CONTRIBUTORS, AND LICENSES

    Text and image sources, contributors, and licenses

    9.1

    Text

    Non sequitur (logic) Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non%20sequitur%20(logic)?oldid=648161393 Contributors: Bryan Derksen,


    Wayne Hardman, Khendon, Dieter Simon, PhilipMW, Tregoweth, Iulianu, Evercat, Darkonc, Dyss, Charles Matthews, Timwi, Dcoetzee,
    Furrykef, Rls, Paul Klenk, R3m0t, Rfc1394, Dodger~enwiki, AstroNox, Brian Kendig, CyborgTosser, Taak, Junkyardprince, Fishal, WhiteDragon, Piotrus, Tels~enwiki, Benzh~enwiki, Lacrimosus, R, TedPavlic, Will2k, Night Gyr, Project2501a, El C, Grick, Longhair, Ctrl
    build, DG~enwiki, Jumbuck, Gary, Theaterfreak64, Goatbear, ABCD, Ashley Pomeroy, Curi~enwiki, Aruthra, Gestrin, EnSamulili, Before My Ken, Mandarax, Msiddalingaiah, BD2412, MZMcBride, FlaBot, SchuminWeb, WarpObscura, WhyBeNormal, YurikBot, Hairy
    Dude, Tavilis, Woling, Nlu, Lt-wiki-bot, RickReinckens, Shawnc, Scolaire, SmackBot, McGeddon, Punkgeek, Midway, Ciacchi, Mladilozof, RedHillian, Fuhghettaboutit, BesselDekker, Enr-v, John, Gobonobo, Robosh, Ospinad, Stratadrake, Grumpyyoungman01, Bahati,
    Tawkerbot4, Pampas Cat, Harryzilber, Albany NY, .anacondabot, Repku, Brewhaha@edmc.net, David Eppstein, Stolsvik, STBot, UBeR,
    Reedy Bot, Rvaznyvfgxrvazny, H8jd5, Aervanath, Fooghter20x, Sikvod00, Alcmaeonid, SieBot, Quasirandom, JSpung, ClueBot, JFlav,
    Rhododendrites, NuclearWarfare, Resuna, Eebster the Great, SilvonenBot, MystBot, Addbot, Luckas-bot, Amirobot, Pcap, Anypodetos,
    RandomAct, Citation bot, Darylms, GrouchoBot, Omnipaedista, SassoBot, Machine Elf 1735, Ambience2000, Bullercruz1, Fortranito,
    CobraBot, Obankston, Mastermike14, Chricho, ZroBot, ClueBot NG, Helpful Pixie Bot, Walter Mouton, CSB radio, Sol1, Jtech50,
    Mer109, SamWilson989 and Anonymous: 118

    9.2

    Images

    File:Folder_Hexagonal_Icon.svg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/48/Folder_Hexagonal_Icon.svg License: Cc-bysa-3.0 Contributors: ? Original artist: ?


    File:Socrates.png Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cd/Socrates.png License: Public domain Contributors:
    Transferred from en.wikipedia to Commons. Original artist: The original uploader was Magnus Manske at English Wikipedia Later versions
    were uploaded by Optimager at en.wikipedia.
    File:Symbol_list_class.svg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/db/Symbol_list_class.svg License: Public domain Contributors: ? Original artist: ?

    9.3

    Content license

    Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0

    You might also like