My mind has been mulling over a question that I can’t quite seem to think through, and I’m hoping you’ll help.
In any given discussion about non-sequiturs, can a comment that follows, no matter how random, ever actually in itself be a non-sequitur?
Your best answers in the comments!
I think not. It would either further discuss the topic of non-sequiturs, or it would be an example of what would normally be considered a non-sequitur, but isn’t in this case, as that is what the discussion is about anyway. While thinking about non-sequiturs, I found a cool list of fallacious arguments.
Nice link…thanks! Hmm…but if the discussion then continued on the random tangent, instead of further along the lines of non-sequiturism?
LOL-Definition: Non-sequitourism – Visiting random places that have no relation to each other.
The word “lethologica” describes the state of not being able to remember the word you want.
I love paradoxes like that. I have friends who were in a band they named “Scripted Failures” So if a failure was supposed to happen, isn’t it a success?
@ Fayyaad: Well, if the random tangent then became the topic of discussion, then it wouldn’t be so random anymore, and hence not a non-sequitur.
@ Domestic Scientist: Yep
I often use that strategy for movies. I have low expectations of them so as to avoid disappointment. It usually works…
on a totally different note – i am not sure if the pic is cute or not. the pumpkin looks all mean, but the kitten is sleeping peacefully. is there some hidden philospohical or religious message? or are you trying to juxtapose evil and good?
The pic was something about as random as I could find, given the topic of conversation
Wow. I never thought that my method of conversation would become a blog post.