Fallacies of Generalization
Sometimes, based on limited facts and information, a general rule is applied to an exceptional case, leading to the fallacy of generalization. In this fallacy, we make a claim based on insufficient evidence or make a conclusion about a large population using a small or unrepresentative sample.
Sometimes, the generalisation would be made without giving any reason or evidence, as the speaker assumes its truth to be so commonly accepted that he does not have to produce any evidence. . For instance, when we claim that “All politicians are corrupt” or “Everyone loves sport,” we resort to hasty or sweeping generalisation.
Another form of generalisation fallacy results from using anecdotal evidence to generate a universal principle. It is quite common among motivational coaches, who often present their rags to riches story for the audience and then claim, ‘If I can do it, can anyone do it?’ Sometimes, they present the story of a poor person (or their own stories) who achieved great success in his life and then conclude that if they can do it, so can you.
The general conclusion based on anecdotal evidence is fallacious because thousands of people fail to achieve success by using the same techniques whose stories people never tell. For example, some people from low-income families may indeed succeed in getting into Harvard. Still, it is a fact that at Harvard and other Ivy League colleges, there are more students from families in the top 1 per cent (income of more than $630,000 per year) than there are students from all the families in the bottom half of the income distribution combined. Hence, a poor person getting into Harvard is an exception which does not prove the rule. [1]
Sometimes, an argument highlights the exceptions, and then generalises it in the form of rule.
- Mr X committed suicide
- Mr X was a rich man.
- Therefore, money does not make a person happy.
In this case, a single incident was used to make a rule without any supporting data. In the real world, for every rich person committing suicide, dozens of poor people also commit suicide. Moreover, in all likelihood, the rich person did not commit suicide due to excess wealth, but for some emotional reasons, while poverty may actually lead to suicide in many cases.
The following are some common examples and the reasons for the fallacy.
Example 1 (Generalising personal experience)
Argument
- You have a transit flight via Frankfurt Airport, Germany. On the way to the gate, several passengers hastily bump into you without apologizing.
- Conclusion: “Germans are so rude!”
Fallacy: You are forming a view about the people of a nationality with just one experience.
Example 2 (Selective perspective)
Argument
- Everyone has been given the right to equality under the Constitution.
- Therefore, it is wrong to provide special privileges to the physically disabled people”.
Fallacy: The argument ignores the responsibility of the state to provide a level playing field and dignified life to all citizens. Hence, giving special treatment to people belonging to the disadvantaged class does not deny the right of equality of normal people.
Example 3 (Anecdotal evidence)
Argument
- X was a school dropout, who built a multibillion-dollar enterprise
- If X can do it, so can any person.
Fallacy: The argument ignores the school dropouts who failed to become successful entrepreneurs. You must ask to provide statistical support instead of anecdotal evidence.
Example 4: (Using Irrelevant Reasons)
Argument
- Bill Gates, one of the richest persons in the world, got divorced
- Hrithik Roshan, one of the most handsome actors in Hindi cinema, got a divorce
- Therefore, “Money and looks can’t get you love”, or “Marriage of wealthy and good-looking people does not last”.
Fallacy: The argument presents anecdotal evidence instead of data. It uses irrelevant cause (money/looks) as the reason for divorce and ignores the real cause of divorce.
Example 6 (Using linguistic vagueness)
Argument
- Many successful people are unhappy
- Many unsuccessful people are happy
- Therefore, success does not make a person happy.
Fallacy: Most people feel happy when they succeed and unhappy when they fail. Numerous studies have established this relationship. However, a few people may be unhappy despite success and happy despite being unsuccessful, but they are exceptions and not the rule. Hence, it is illogical to conclude based on exceptions while ignoring the rule. Some successful people may be unhappy, but for other reasons, not due to their success.
How to Avoid the Fallacy of Generalisation
Most people commit the fallacy of hasty generalisation without supporting their claims with reason and evidence. They often collect biased samples to prove their claim and ignore the counterexamples. Furthermore, a representative sample should be used instead of relying on anecdotal evidence, and proper statistical methods should be used to draw conclusions or correlations.
It is important to avoid the absolute language using terms like ‘everyone’, ‘always, and ‘never’, because there is hardly a claim that can be valid for every person all the time. The claims can be easily demolished by producing just one piece of evidence where the claim is not valid. Hence, it would be better to qualify the condition suitably; for instance, instead of all, we can say ‘most politicians are corrupt”. It will be even better to provide some tangible evidence, like studies from an independent agency, to support our claim. Hence, to avoid the fallacy of generalisation, you must seek diverse sources and evaluate evidence critically. It is essential to avoid unnecessary assumptions and encourage open-minded discussion.
Reference
[1] The Tyranny of Merit: What’s Become of the Common Good?, Michael J. Sandel
