According to Halpern (1996, p. 197), arguments that utilize irrelevant reasons are fairly common: "The Latin word for this sort of fallacy is non-sequitur, which literally translates to 'it doesn't follow.' In other words, the reason or premise is unrelated to the conclusion." Since relevant premises are a key criteria for building sound arguments, it follows that critical thinkers must learn to recognize and avoid such fallacies.

However, in the real world this is perhaps easier said than done since the use of force often tends to sway decisions in favor of the person who is making the threat, implied or otherwise. An example that comes readily to mind is the manner in which advertisers have coerced sports bodies to disallow ambush marketing: "It is important that any sports body has the right to control what is being brought into their events...to protect the millions of pounds of investment that...
[ View Full Essay]