Hasty Generalization

A Hasty Generalization is a logical fallacy that occurs when a conclusion is drawn about a whole population or group based on a small or unrepresentative sample. It involves making a broad or sweeping statement without sufficient evidence to support it, often because the sample size is too small or the examples chosen are not typical of the group as a whole.

Example 1:

Argument: "I met two people from that city, and they were both rude. People from that city must be rude."
This is a Hasty Generalization because the conclusion about all people from that city is based on only two interactions, which is not enough evidence to draw a valid conclusion about the entire population.

Example 2:

Argument: "I ate at that restaurant once, and the food was terrible. All the food at that restaurant must be bad."
Here, the argument generalizes about the quality of food at the restaurant based on just one experience, which is a Hasty Generalization because a single visit is not sufficient to judge the overall quality.

Example 3:

Argument: "My grandfather smoked his whole life and lived until he was 90. Smoking can’t be that bad for you."
This is a Hasty Generalization because it assumes that smoking isn't harmful based on one individual's experience, which doesn't account for the vast majority of people who have experienced serious health problems from smoking.

Why it’s a fallacy:

A Hasty Generalization is fallacious because it makes broad conclusions based on limited or unrepresentative evidence. A valid generalization should be based on a large and diverse sample, ensuring that the evidence truly reflects the broader population. Making conclusions from a small or biased sample can lead to inaccurate or misleading statements.