Question

...
Arthas

Is this an example of hasty generalization?

Specifically, I came upon this post while scrolling through Instagram. The text in the post reads -

“You are getting attached again. Did you forget what happened the last time?”

While in general this seems to be cogent enough, I am not sure whether there is any logical value to comments such as these since there is no mention of probabilities of either of the two events, getting hurt or not getting hurt, specified. A logically sound phrasing of this comment, as it appears to me, could be something to the tune of -

“You are getting attached again. Remember what happened to you previously when you got attached since there is a possibility that you might face a similar circumstance again.”

 

So, is the first statement a case of hasty generalization? Or any other form of logical fallacy? Is it simple too broad a statement by itself and thus can be construed no more than an opinion?

asked on Monday, Feb 21, 2022 06:17:42 PM by Arthas

Top Categories Suggested by Community

Comments
...
3
Shawn writes:

There is always a possibility that something may happen regardless of what happened previously. I may have a good experience one time and a bad one the next. Or I could have a bad experience one time and a good one the next. The two experiences are not causally related to one another. 

Consider the fact that a formal fallacy exists because of an error in the structure of the argument. In other words, the conclusion doesn’t follow from the premises. All formal fallacies are specific types of non sequiturs, or arguments in which the conclusions do not follow from the premises. 

The implied conclusion in your first statement is that getting attached again will lead to the same or similar outcome as the last attachment. But the conclusion does not follow from the premise, ie an attachment will lead to the same or similar outcome.

posted on Monday, Feb 21, 2022 07:09:51 PM
...
0
Bo Bennett, PhD writes:
[To Shawn]

Hi Shawn,

You have some great answers. It would be better if you did post these as answers rather than comments on the question. This way, you can save me the trouble of answering :)

[ login to reply ] posted on Tuesday, Feb 22, 2022 06:06:04 AM

Want to get notified of all questions as they are asked? Update your mail preferences and turn on "Instant Notification."

Eat Meat... Or Don't.

Roughly 95% of Americans don’t appear to have an ethical problem with animals being killed for food, yet all of us would have a serious problem with humans being killed for food. What does an animal lack that a human has that justifies killing the animal for food but not the human?

As you start to list properties that the animal lacks to justify eating them, you begin to realize that some humans also lack those properties, yet we don’t eat those humans. Is this logical proof that killing and eating animals for food is immoral? Don’t put away your steak knife just yet.

In Eat Meat… Or Don’t, we examine the moral arguments for and against eating meat with both philosophical and scientific rigor. This book is not about pushing some ideological agenda; it’s ultimately a book about critical thinking.

Get 20% off this book and all Bo's books*. Use the promotion code: websiteusers

* This is for the author's bookstore only. Applies to autographed hardcover, audiobook, and ebook.

Get the Book

Answers

...
TrappedPrior (RotE)
0

I don't know why Bo Didn't answer this, this looks very easy. misleading vividness 
answered on Tuesday, Feb 22, 2022 11:06:24 AM by TrappedPrior (RotE)

TrappedPrior (RotE) Suggested These Categories

Comments
...
0
TrappedPrior (RotE) writes:

Sometimes he is busy and can't reply, or someone else has done the work for him.

Of course, you also get the illegible posts that are "unworthy" of his academic brilliance! :)

posted on Tuesday, Feb 22, 2022 02:52:19 PM