If you are using your own sentence as a valid example of connective semicolons, then I would ask that you rescind that advice. (Please understand that I mean no offense. I'm just tired of holding my tongue as this thread beats more bad grammar into swords.)

Semicolons are not replacements for verbal pauses, nor are they replacements for commas. They link the previous complex sentence to another, turning the precedent into a premise for the antecedent's conclusion. The precedent thought could have survived as a sentence on its own, and make the reader keep it in mind as a setup or a preface.

The "hard stop" is exactly what needs to happen when you have finished a thought. "You should advise him to use semicolons" is a complete thought. Defining a semicolon (even though the subsequent definition is invalid) is a separate thought. You could have instead said, "...use semicolons, as they split..."; the meaning would be the same. Notice the previous sentence is "A, quoting B; thus C."

The Oatmeal has a great description, in case you feel I'm full of it.

It's important to parse written language as something different from transcribed speech. People may feel that their sentences are childish if they are too short. They want to extend the moment, as if a short sentence were premature. Thus they keep connecting thoughts that do not belong in the same sentence.

Other languages have tools for non-concise paragraphs. English lacks the declensions and verb tenses that allow other languages to extend sentences without confusing the reader. It also lacks tonal marks. Thus a reader cannot guess the highs or lows that would be in the spoken version of one's writing. Appropriating a piece of punctuation to attempt the same is confusing.

We have enough reasons not to do this. Let's not do it.