Examples Of Hasty Generalization

681 Words3 Pages

Hasty Generalization/ Conclusion (Dicto Secundum) The first fallacy is an example of a Hasty Generalization. A Hasty Generalization is when there is not enough information to draw a conclusion but one is inappropriately found anyway. The character from Twelve Angry Men who committed this fallacy was the Father, juror #3. The Father referenced the boy’s trial as an “open and shut case.” The Father’s reference was a Hasty Generalization, because it could imply that he only listened to the prosecution during the trial. By saying it was simple to just open and shut the case, he must have not given the other side to the story a chance. What he should have done was considered both sides and made a judgment from that. It is important to recognize …show more content…

Guilt By Association is when a person accuses another person of acting a certain way simply because they belong to or are associated with a group. The character from Twelve Angry Men who committed the fallacy was the Yankee, juror #7. The Yankee repeatedly calls juror #5 “Baltimore,” which is not the man’s name. The Yankee’s comment to juror #5 is a Guilt By Association because Yankee is trying to imply that since juror #5 is a Baltimore fan, he must be like other people from Baltimore. Yankee is claiming that juror #5 acts just like other people from Baltimore, and the stereotype is poor and violent. What he should have done was learn more about the man’s background to see if he is like the stereotype before assuming. It is important to recognize Guilt By Association because it is usually related to stereotypes. They project a false image that could be biased, and can cause a person to be judged by the people they surround themselves with. If a person’s friends get into trouble at school often, the person could be disliked by the teacher even when he didn’t do anything wrong. This type of prejudice is not a legitimate way to form an argument. Circular Reasoning (Circulus In …show more content…

How do we know the boy wasn’t at the movies? The boy couldn’t remember the names of the movies.. Why couldn’t he remember the names of the movies? The boy wasn’t at the movies. The Stockbroker should have used other facts in the claim to support his argument instead of using two the only support each other. This is not a strong claim because the statements only get support from each other. It is important to recognize when a person uses Circular Reasoning in an argument because it will usually appear true and foolproof. Both of the reasons are a cause and effect for the other, and it seems to all make sense. Although the claim appears true, it usually has vague premises that lead to a conclusion, but fails to leave out other important facts. There is no useful information used to draw the conclusion. If a person was to argue that his friend is stupid, he could reason by saying it’s because the friend isn’t smart. The reasoning to why the friend isn’t smart would be because he is stupid. The claim has no real evidence or explanation to support

Open Document