Hasty generalization is an
informal fallacy of faulty generalization, which involves reaching an
inductive generalization based on insufficient evidence Its opposite fallacy is called
slothful induction, which consists of denying a reasonable conclusion of an inductive argument (e.g. "it was just a coincidence").
Examples Hasty generalization usually follows the pattern: • X is true for A. • X is true for B. • Therefore, X is true for C, D, E, etc. For example, if a person travels through a town for the first time and sees 10 people, all of them children, they may erroneously conclude that there are no adult residents in the town. Or a person might look at a number line, and notice that the number 1 is a
square number; 3 is a
prime number, 5 is a prime number, and 7 is a prime number; 9 is a square number; 11 is a prime number, and 13 is a prime number. From these observations, the person might claim that all odd numbers are either prime or square, while in reality, 15 is a counterexample.
Alternative names The fallacy is also known as: • Black swan fallacy • Illicit generalization • Fallacy of insufficient sample • Generalization from the particular •
Leaping to a conclusion • Blanket statement • Hasty induction • Law of small numbers • Unrepresentative sample •
Secundum quid When referring to a generalization made from a single example, the terms
fallacy of the lonely fact, or the
fallacy of proof by example, might be used. When evidence is intentionally excluded to bias the result, the fallacy of exclusion—a form of
selection bias—is said to be involved. ==See also==