Some would argue that it is a tautology, as in the statement, “They came one after the other in succession.” For, as “one after the other” is saying the same as “in succession”, there is an unnecessary redundancy at play.
Now, the reason why it is perfectly acceptable to make the latter statement “unnecessary redundancy” as opposed to merely using “redundancy” to describe the tautology (for one might argue that all redundancies are by definition unnecessary and therefore we have again used a form of tautology by stating, “unnecessary redundancies”), it is undeniably the case that certain redundancies, while perhaps not “necessary” in the strict sense, may be chosen for optimizing a magnification of attention.
For example, one might want to double-emphasize a child’s accomplishment and exclaim, “What a great job! That was very good!” Now, for a grownup, the single exclamation may have been adequate; but for a child, the attentive second exclamation may be felt to be necessary to emphasize to the child the enormity of the small accomplishment.
As for the tautology at hand, which has been circuitously avoided as a result of going off on a tangent (for, a tangent itself is the unnecessary sidebar, but one which is engaged in for pure delight). Of course, “going off” and “tangent” might also be considered a tautology of sorts, because a “tangent” by definition is likened to “going off”.
Are all mistakes by definition “stupid”? If so, it is a tautology; but one might counter, many scientific experiments are “mistakes”, but not necessarily “stupid”. Yet, it is a commonplace theme to describe most mistakes as such, but perhaps it is because we normally want to avoid adding insult to injury that we describe most mistakes as merely “mistakes” without adding the salt of stupidity to the mix.
For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a health condition such that the health condition prevents the Federal or Postal worker from performing all of the basic elements of his or her Federal or Postal job, it may be time to prepare, formulate and file an effective Federal Disability Retirement application under the current Federal Employees Retirement System (FERS), through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.
But in doing so, don’t make a stupid mistake by thinking that you can be your own lawyer and represent yourself; but, in such instances, while the mistakes you may make may not necessarily be stupid, they may nevertheless end up with a synonym close to it, as in — “avoidable”.
Contact a Federal Attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law, lest “stupid” become the tautology which defeats an avoidable mistake.
Robert R. McGill
Lawyer exclusively representing Federal and Postal employees to secure their Federal Disability Retirement benefits under FERS from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.