Hasty Generalization

Author(s):  
John Woods
Keyword(s):  
2006 ◽  
Vol 119 (3) ◽  
pp. 481 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gregory A. Bryant ◽  
David J. Buller

1834 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 153-190 ◽  
Author(s):  
James D. Forbes

1. The science of Meteorology must be ranked, at the present moment, among the most rising branches of natural knowledge. The transition from the hasty generalization which always marks the embryo state of science, to the application of sober inductive analysis, is one so important, and so truly interesting, as to repay amply the philosophical abstinence which it imposes. No more important lesson, indeed, can be learned, than from the very examples of crude speculation, which, for centuries, the progress of this subject has afforded among the multitudes whose scientific acquirements are limited to the art of consulting a weather-glass, or registering a thermometer, little imagining that the very science they affect to cultivate, ranks among its phenomena the interwoven effects of remote and recondite causes,—a science which, to use the words of Mr Herschel, is “one of the most complicated and difficult, but, at the same time, interesting subjects of physical research: one, however, which has of late begun to be studied with a diligence which promises the speedy disclosure of relations and laws, of which, at present, we can form but a very imperfect notion.”


Bad Arguments ◽  
2018 ◽  
pp. 354-356
Author(s):  
Michael J. Muniz
Keyword(s):  

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohammad Manzoor Malik

This research is aimed at providing critical appraisal of some informal logical fallacies from the Quran and Sunnah. The fallacies are defined adequately, analyzed logically, understood conceptually, and then criticized from Islamic perspective based on the Quran and Sunnah. First some fallacies of relevance are undertaken. Argumentum ad Hominem (Argument Directed at the Person) according to Islamic perspective is valid in respect to transmitted knowledge (uloom naqliah); on the other hand, this fallacy is invalid in respect to rational knowledge (uloom aqliyah) in inclusion of empirical knowledge (uloom tajribiyah). Argumentum ad Populum (Appeal to the People) fallacy according to Islamic perspective is accepted as a valid fallacy if what someone, elite, or majority hold is against the evidences and facts. However, in terms of keeping law and order in a society, Islam encourages the concept of Shura (consultation and group decision) and jamaah (unity and group) to make it possible that among many good options, Muslims would be able to follow any one with majority agreement to get over any disagreement or conflict. Among fallacies of presumption, some fallacies were undertaken as follows. Secundum quid (Fallacy of Hasty Generalization) is accepted fallacy according to Islamic perspective. The Islamic spirit is against hasty generalizations. Argumentum ad Verecundiam (Argument from Authority) is an accepted fallacy according to Islamic perspective. Islam emphasizes on evidence and proof in accepting or negating any fact. This is primary. However, proper authorities should be consulted on matters, this is what the Quran and Sunnah encourages.


Philosophy ◽  
1931 ◽  
Vol 6 (23) ◽  
pp. 307-322
Author(s):  
G. C. Field

Is there really such a thing as moral progress? Do we get any better as time goes on? It is a question which must often exercise the minds of those who reflect on moral questions at all. And it is a frequent topic of discussion, both in private conversations and in the written contributions of a good many of our popular philosophers. Of some of these contributions one may safely say that their chief value is as a warning against the dangers of hasty generalization on a subject such as this. And, taking advantage of such a warning, I shall make no attempt to give a final or dogmatic answer to this question. All I can try to do, within the limits of a single lecture, is to disentangle some of the most important considerations that seem to be in people's minds in discussing this question, and to estimate their importance as arguments on one side or the other.


2017 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. 358
Author(s):  
Rohmani Nur Indah

<p>Writing argumentative essays becomes a challenge for both teachers and students as it relates to various aspects. One of them is on the teaching and learning of critical thinking skills comprising the awareness to avoid logical flaws. The real reflection of critical thinking can be traced through students’ ability to express their thought in the form of arguments which have no logical flaws. Good arguments must be supported by convincing claims and careful choice of wordings which is free from fallacious statements. This paper identifies the fallacious statements or logical flaws occurring in the argumentative writing of the students of an Islamic University in Indonesia. The findings show the faulty reasoning found in terms of the discussion on the topics, the flawed relations with the audience, and the relations with the characters involved in the arguments. The types of the logical flaws also concern the claims expressed. On claims of fact, the fallacies found include hasty generalization, irrelevancy, slippery slope, oversimplification and begging the question. Regarding pathos, the fallacy type covers ad populum, appeal to emotion premises and red herring. Meanwhile, the ethos fallacy occurs in straw man only. On claims of value, more faulty reasoning is found compared to the discussion on the topics which are considered less familiar. In the logos fallacy for instance, the whole types of fallacy are found. The pathos found involves appeal to emotion premises and red herring, while the ethos fallacy occurs in appeal to authority and ad hominem. On claims of policy, the similar tendency of ethos is also found while the pathos existing is in the form of appeal to emotion premises. Therefore, it is recommended that the students develop their critical thinking skills which involve constructing logical and flawless reasoning.</p><strong>Keywords: </strong><em>logical flaws, critical thinking, logos, ethos, pathos</em>


2011 ◽  
Vol 31 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Douglas Walton ◽  
Fabrizio Macagno

Manipulation of quotation, shown to be a common tactic of argumentation in this paper, is associated with fallacies like wrenching from context, hasty generalization, equivocation, accent, the straw man fallacy, and ad hominem arguments. Several examples are presented from everyday speech, legislative debates and trials. Analysis using dialog models explains the critical defects of argumentation illustrated in each of the examples. In the formal dialog system CB, a proponent and respondent take turns in making moves in an orderly goal-directed sequence of argumentation in which the proponent tries to persuade the respondent to become committed to a conclusion by asking questions and offering arguments. Analyzing quotation by using the notion of commitment in dialog, it is shown (a) how an arguer’s previous assertions can be brought to light in the course of a dialog to deal with problems arising from misquotation, (b) how the profile of dialog model allows a critic to analyse the fundamental effects misquotation brings about in a dialog, and (c) how the critic can use such an analysis to correct the problem.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document