HASTY GENERALIZATION

Definition

 A type of fallacy where an arguer draws a general or universal conclusion from insufficient
evidence or data.
 Even if the given premises may be true, they are inadequate to correctly justify the conclusion.
 Also known as converse accident, as the specific scenarios are not applicable to the
generalization presented.

Examples:

1. My friend Y owns an iPhone, and she goes to Starbucks every day. So too is my classmate J.
Based on this, I can clearly say that all people who owns an iPhone goes to Starbucks every
day.
2. C experienced an abusive relationship with her ex-girlfriend before which led him to conclude
that all girls are abusive.
3. My father smoked four packs of cigarettes a day since age fourteen and lived until age sixty-
nine. Therefore, smoking really can’t be that bad for you.

Difference from Inductive Reasoning

In inductive reasoning, one can make a logical generalization as long as the sample cases or
supporting facts are representative of the whole.

Examples:

1. I asked my 5 friends if they are in favor of the plastic ban in Cagayan de Oro. A voted yes. B
also voted yes. So did C. It would seem that they must be in favor of the ban.
2. The clerks of court in Branches 17, 25, and 38 of the Regional Trial Court are lawyers.
Therefore, clerks of court must be lawyers.