Faulty Generalization - Inductive Fallacies

Inductive Fallacies

• 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" when it is very likely not to be.
• The overwhelming exception is related to the hasty generalization, but working from the other end. It is a generalization which is accurate, but tags on a qualification which eliminates enough cases (as exceptions); that what remains is much less impressive than what the original statement might have led one to assume.
• Biased sample – When the above happen because of (personal) bias of the sampling entity.
• Misleading vividness is a kind of hasty generalization that appeals to the senses.
• Statistical special pleading occurs when the interpretation of the relevant statistic is "massaged" by looking for ways to reclassify or requantify data from one portion of results, but not applying the same scrutiny to other categories.

"All generalizations are dangerous, even this one."