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]
Creating a false dilemma (either-or fallacy) in which the situation is oversimplified, also called false dichotomy; Selectively using facts (card stacking) Making false or misleading comparisons (false equivalence or false analogy) Generalizing quickly and sloppily (hasty generalization) (secundum quid)
The fallacy can take many forms, such as cherry picking, hasty generalization, proof by assertion, and so on. [1] The fallacy does not mean that every single instance of sense data or testimony must be considered a fallacy, only that anecdotal evidence, when improperly used in logic, results in a fallacy.
This fallacy is related to the fallacy of hasty generalization, in which an unwarranted inference is made from a statement about a sample to a statement about the population from which it is drawn. The fallacy of composition is the converse of the fallacy of division.
The fallacy of converse accident is a form of hasty generalization. The converse form is known as the fallacy of accident. [2] External links. Stephen's guide ...
2. Thou shall not misrepresent or exaggerate a person's argument in order to make it easier to attack. ("Straw Man Fallacy) 3. Thou shall not use small numbers to represent the whole. ("Hasty Generalization") 4. Thou shall not argue thy position by assuming one of its premises is true. ("Begging the Question") 5.
[16]: 147 The generalization, in this case, ignores that insanity is an exceptional case to which the general rights of property do not unrestrictedly apply. Hasty generalization, on the other hand, involves the converse mistake of drawing a universal conclusion based on a small number of instances.