Originally posted by Paul manata
Originally posted by Goosha
Paul, non-sequitar means that my premises do not follow logically from one to the next but you said that originally that you tried to construct my argument to be valid...apparently you failed. Perhaps one or more of my premises are false but if my argument non-sequitar as you claim then its not even worth debating the propositions since even if they were all true the argument would still be false. Maybe we need to work at first making my argument valid and then debating the individual propositions.
No Jayson. Technically, any fallacy is a non-sequitar. Valid arguments can still commit fallacies. Furthermore, there would be a relation issue. So, for example:
1. If I do my hair nice then women will love me.
2. I did my hair nice.
3. Therefore women will love me.
As we can see, besides the fact that I have no hair, this is a *valid* argument. But since there is no *relation* or *connection* between doing your hair nice and women loving you this would be a non-sequitar. So....
I see....I have created a smaller form of my argument that you may find valid in form but still non-sequitar. However, you still have not answered my challenge which I think is the best way illustrating my argument. Not to mention, it would provide for you a way to actually prove that my argument is non-sequitar.
[Edited on 27-1-2005 by Goosha]