4 ms·
You say it’s a non sequitur and immediately restate the necessity to replace a helmet that’s taken an impact. I don’t reckon that’s how a non sequitur works:
by TheSpiceIsLife 7y ago
You say it’s a non sequitur and immediately restate the necessity to replace a helmet that’s taken an impact.
I don’t reckon that’s how a non sequitur works:
A non sequitur is a conclusion or reply that doesn't follow logically from the previous statement.
- benmusch 7y agoYou must be fun at parties
- shuckles 7y agoOnly at the parties worth attending.
- TheSpiceIsLife 7y agoHaha, i always get a chuckle out of that phrase :) I’ll leave it up to my fellow party-attendees to decide ;)
- JshWright 7y agoI'd be down for a party. When and where?
- TheSpiceIsLife 7y agoCouple on tonight after canoe polo. You need a lift?
- noway_ 7y agoImplying the parent is any better for inaccurately stating it's a non sequitur?
- TylerE 7y agoIs there any "rebuttal" less convincing?
- dang 7y agoThis comment breaks the site guidelines. Would you mind reviewing them and sticking to the rules when posting to HN? We'd be grateful. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- loeg 7y agoIn TFA, the (quoted) preceding sentences are repeatedly accentuating the severity of the crash and directly implying that the severity is the reason for the replacement. The severity has has nothing to do with the need to replace the helmet, i.e., it does not follow logically.
- TheSpiceIsLife 7y agoNo, a non sequitur would go something like this: Bob was plantings some flowers. He had to replace his helmet. Not a non sequitur: Bob crashed his motorbike. He had to replace his helmet. It might have been better if they’d written something about how a helmet needs replacing after any impact, sure.
- hathawsh 7y agoThis is an interesting logic discussion. :-) Does the term non sequitur apply to correctly formed statements where the conclusion of the statement is incorrect? I would be inclined to agree with TheSpiceIsLife and say no. Because the article is based on limited sources, the article's conclusion about helmet replacement is incorrect, even if it's well-formed. EDIT: Here's an interesting list of non sequiturs, many of which fit the same pattern as the article. I think loeg is probably right after all. https://examples.yourdictionary.com/non-sequitur-examples.html https://examples.yourdictionary.com/non-sequitur-examples.ht...
- kfrzcode 7y agoAlso it's important distinction because mightni imply to reader they wouldn't otherwise have to replace a helmet which is dangerous.
- dang 7y agoWe detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21065975 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21065975.