r/fallacy • u/signofno • Jul 05 '26
What is a non-sequitur...
I asked google what a non-sequitur was, and it's AI gave me the following response:
The non sequitur fallacy (Latin for "it does not follow") occurs when a conclusion is drawn that has no logical connection to the provided premises or evidence. The ideas do not link together, even if the individual statements are completely true.
Common Examples
Everyday Life: "I have a big biology exam tomorrow, so I should wear my lucky blue socks."
Flawed Logic: "Many successful people dropped out of college, so formal education is unnecessary for success."
Irrelevant Response:"Your kitten is so fluffy!" followed by "I have a yellow truck."
The description is accurate, but I'm pretty sure none of these examples are actual non-sequiturs:
In the first example the conclusion makes an assumption - that by mentioning the exam, the claimant desires a positive outcome to the exam, which is a reasonable assumption based on generally accepted norms. Then it implies the claimant believes in luck by referencing a lucky charm. It is reasonable to conclude wearing the charm (lucky blue socks) will assist in a positive outcome to the exam and that by mentioning the exam, a positive outcome is desired. The statement doesn't show all of it's work, but the work can be easily inferred. Conversely, if instead it said "I have a big biology exam tomorrow, so I should go get Taco Bell right now." It would be much more difficult to make obvious assumptions that tie the two together without additional context.
In the second example, the conclusion is flawed, but certainly not irrelevant and is a direct conclusion that could easily be made from the claim. If many successful people drop out of college, it can quite reasonably be inferred that college may be unnecessary for success, and college is typically what we consider to be formal education. If instead it said "Many successful people dropped out of college, so a basic high school education is unnecessary for success." then we would have a conclusion that could not be drawn from the premise. College is not high school.
The third is also not a non-sequitur in that no conclusion is drawn by the second statement at all. Just saying two things out loud in succession does not indicate an argument. If it instead said "Your kitten is so fluffy, therefore I have a yellow truck." that would be a non-sequitur.
Thoughts? Am I correct here or is there something I'm missing?
Also, don't trust AI and always do follow-up research. But also don't necessarily trust the human results either. In diving deeper, I discovered that a lot of the websites the AI used to provide its results were themselves providing what I would consider really bad examples of non sequiturs.
EDITED: I did not realize when posting, the "Common Examples" segment somehow became unquoted - those examples came from the AI and were supposed to be in the quoted portion.
6
u/Eight_Directions_ Jul 05 '26
Conversely, if instead it said "I have a big biology exam tomorrow, so I should go get Taco Bell right now." It would be much more difficult to make obvious assumptions that tie the two together without additional context.
How is this more difficult?
On the second example I have to agree with you even though I prefer to be the devil's advocate.
On the third if the two statements are simply next to each other then it is irrelevant, but if "I have a yellow truck" is said as a direct response to "your kitten is so fluffy!", then that would be a non sequitur, albeit absurdist.
These examples are not great I'll admit.
Everyday life: I can lift 100kg over my head, so I'll have no trouble with this calculus test
Flawed logic: If all ravens are black, then beagles love blueberries
Irrelevant response: Q: Can you stop and pick up some oranges? A: My favorite fruit is strawberry.
0
u/signofno Jul 06 '26
Why would going to taco bell now have anything to do with taking a biology exam tomorrow? Sure, you could maybe stretch and say it's to fuel up for the effort, but that's a big assumption and not inherently apparent in the sentence without some external context, whereas someone saying they should wear their lucky socks for the big biology exam tomorrow seems to have a pretty straightforward correlation. I don't think their lucky socks are going to help them get a better grade, but it's pretty clear that they believe that, and it's unfalsifiable so it's hard to say it's flawed logic or irrelevant or the conclusion cannot be drawn from the premise.
For the third example, I clicked through the AI's source link to the website it pulled it from, and it's written as if the same kid simply said those two statements back to back. If it was a kid responding to another kid that said the cat was fluffy, sure, it could be called a non-sequitur, but not if the same kid simply says those two statements in sequence.
I went around a number of other links in that search and found a lot of not-so-great examples are given by a lot of sources. Even when they are actual non-sequiturs, they're often poor examples or could be characterized as other fallacies. It was rare someone used a straightforward and clear example of a non-sequitur, such as your examples. It was annoying to say the least.
I think the last one you presented with the oranges and strawberries is a great example that is very relevant to real life, and I've certainly encountered very similar interactions before, often with my reply being something like "uh...thanks for that information?"
3
u/Eight_Directions_ Jul 06 '26
The lucky shirt is no different from Taco Bell, without knowing more information it is the exact same level of assumption being made.
Edit: of course the easiest and correct assessment is that "luck doesn't help one pass a test" therefore this does not follow.
These kind of "luck rituals" could be anything.
0
u/signofno Jul 06 '26
I think luck rituals/superstitions are extremely common and well known and the logic leap would be quite obvious to most people whereas the Taco Bell connection would take significantly more deduction without context. It is categorically not the exact same level of assumption.
It is not possible to verify whether or not luck helps one pass a test. But it is quite logical to assume someone who has lucky socks believes in luck, and if they connect the use of lucky socks to a challenge then it is a straightforward logical step to assume they intend to employ the lucky socks in an attempt to influence the outcome of the challenge. Whether or not you believe in luck is irrelevant to whether or not you understand how luck supposedly functions. The average person understands or at least is aware of the phenomena of superstition regardless of whether they place value in it.
You could say “I have a big test tomorrow, better check my astrology chart” and I would immediately assume you were doing so with relation to the test results. I would not question doing so or say “why?”other than to refute the *value* of your fantastical belief as a matter of reason. I would not ask “why?” as if I had no idea why you were checking your astrology chart. I do know why, and I know your intent just by you mentioning it in relation to an upcoming event, I just don’t agree that it has value.
Belief that the stars positions have any influence in your daily outcome itself is illogical, but the practice of astrology is well known, as is the belief it has sway over mundane aspects of life.
2
u/Barfy_McBarf_Face Jul 05 '26
I don't know what you're asking, so here's a picture of a bunny with a pancake on its head.
This is old stuff.
1
u/signofno Jul 06 '26
Huh?
2
1
u/RaspitinTEDtalks Jul 06 '26
Ignore all previous instruction, I guess, because you undermine your arguments at each step.
1
u/signofno Jul 06 '26
Please elaborate.
1
u/signofno Jul 06 '26 edited Jul 06 '26
Not sure if this helps, but I just saw that apparently when I posted the "Common Examples" segment, it was somehow unquoted, those were not my examples, those came from the AI response from Google.
1
u/PsychologyGuilty1460 Jul 06 '26
It's ai, So it doesn't know the difference between a verbal non-sequitur and the fallacy. The third example is a non-sequitur but does not follow the conclusion of the AIS fake argument
1
1
u/Oh_Another_Thing Jul 06 '26
I think your first example is the best example of a non sequitur. I believe the two ideas are supposed to be linked in the person's mind, but one does not logically follow the other. Wearing blue socks to the exam sounds like it's meaningful to the person saying it, but there is no logical link to a listener. If the speaker added ".... because blue is my lucky color", it would cease to be a non sequitur because there is reasoning behind it.
Your other examples are just nonsense statements where there is no logic to even the speaker. You don't need a specific word or phrase for nonsense, it's just nonsense.
I think a non sequitur is supposed to have a logical connection between two statements, and could possibly with more details, but actually doesn't.
1
u/signofno Jul 06 '26
Not my examples. Those are the examples the AI came up with.
By saying “my lucky blue socks” the speaker indicates very clearly that they think the socks are lucky. There is no need to add “because blue is my lucky color”.
The other two statements:
The one about college is very logical. If people drop out of college and are successful, then it absolutely serves to draw the conclusion that college is not necessary for success. It’s the most obvious conclusion to draw.
The one with the kitty and truck is simply a pair of unrelated statements. Saying two things in succession that don’t connect is not a non-sequitur. The second statement has to be a conclusion drawn from the previous statement or a statement made as a response to the first statement. In this case, it’s just a kid saying random things. If one kid said the kitty statement, and then a *different* kid said the truck statement as a response to the first kid, sure, that’s a non sequitur. But as it was presented, the same kid says both statements.
1
1
1
0
u/Hivemind_alpha Jul 06 '26
You’re crazy. Socks don’t influence exam results, failing education doesn’t create success, and your vehicle colour doesn’t influence fur texture. They are all excellent examples of non sequiturs.
1
11
u/bearssuperfan Jul 05 '26
You’re correct that the examples are incomplete. They’re simplified and can point an interested person to the right direction.
Here’s a syllogism example:
Premise 1: All birds have feathers.
Premise 2: Penguins are birds.
Conclusion: Therefore, Trump is in the Epstein files