Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Hasty generalization is the fallacy of examining just one or very few examples or studying a single case and generalizing that to be representative of the whole class of objects or phenomena. The opposite, slothful induction , is the fallacy of denying the logical conclusion of an inductive argument, dismissing an effect as "just a coincidence ...
Hasty generalization (fallacy of insufficient statistics, fallacy of insufficient sample, fallacy of the lonely fact, hasty induction, secundum quid, converse accident, jumping to conclusions) – basing a broad conclusion on a small or unrepresentative sample. [55]
Hasty generalization often follows a pattern such as: X is true for A. X is true for B. Therefore, X is true for C, D, etc. While never a valid logical deduction, if such an inference can be made on statistical grounds, it may nonetheless be convincing. This is because with enough empirical evidence, the generalization is no longer a hasty one.
"Your reporter ... jumps to the hasty conclusion that because Bruce lay down with a headache at the home of an actress, and subsequently died from the prescription medication she gave him, he was ...
Hasty generalization, on the other hand, involves the converse mistake of drawing a universal conclusion based on a small number of instances. [16] [8] [20] For example, "I've met two people in Nicaragua so far, and they were both nice to me. So, all people I will meet in Nicaragua will be nice to me". [4]
An argument from anecdote is an informal logical fallacy, when an anecdote is used to draw an improper logical conclusion.The fallacy can take many forms, such as cherry picking, hasty generalization, proof by assertion, and so on.
Italy's justice minister said on Wednesday Rome had no choice but to free a Libyan military officer wanted for war crimes by the International Criminal Court because of what he described as ...
Inductive reasoning is any of various methods of reasoning in which broad generalizations or principles are derived from a body of observations. [1] [2] Inductive reasoning is in contrast to deductive reasoning (such as mathematical induction), where the conclusion of a deductive argument is certain, given the premises are correct; in contrast, the truth of the conclusion of an inductive ...