Question

...
Kris

Hasty generalization?

A man wanted to give me a pamphlet about Jesus, I replied No thank you! His reply...aren't you saved? If you're saved, why don't you want to read about Jesus and the sacrifice that he made? Since your rejecting this pamphlet, it sounds like you're rejecting Christ. 

asked on Monday, Jan 27, 2025 12:15:20 AM by Kris

Top Categories Suggested by Community

Comments

Want to get notified of all questions as they are asked? Update your mail preferences and turn on "Instant Notification."

Eat Meat... Or Don't.

Roughly 95% of Americans don’t appear to have an ethical problem with animals being killed for food, yet all of us would have a serious problem with humans being killed for food. What does an animal lack that a human has that justifies killing the animal for food but not the human?

As you start to list properties that the animal lacks to justify eating them, you begin to realize that some humans also lack those properties, yet we don’t eat those humans. Is this logical proof that killing and eating animals for food is immoral? Don’t put away your steak knife just yet.

In Eat Meat… Or Don’t, we examine the moral arguments for and against eating meat with both philosophical and scientific rigor. This book is not about pushing some ideological agenda; it’s ultimately a book about critical thinking.

Get 20% off this book and all Bo's books*. Use the promotion code: websiteusers

* This is for the author's bookstore only. Applies to autographed hardcover, audiobook, and ebook.

Get the Book

Answers

...
Kostas Oikonomou
1

There's a similar example in the argument by emotive language (rejecting God = rejecting goodness and kindness). You're not rejecting it, maybe you have already read that pamphlet or something similar. 

It's also non sequitur . Not wanting to read a pamphlet doesn't mean you're rejecting what the pamphlet says and certainly doesn't mean you're rejecting Christ.

Apart from the logical fallacies, the guy didn't respect your right to refuse to accept what he was trying to give you, and tried to manipulate you by making you feel bad for not complying with his will. So, I guess a justified response would be "Well, it sure sounds like you're trying to manipulate me, so fuck off!" 
answered on Monday, Jan 27, 2025 10:05:05 AM by Kostas Oikonomou

Kostas Oikonomou Suggested These Categories

Comments
...
0
AI Fallacy Master writes:
[To Kostas Oikonomou] The student's answer provides a cogent analysis of the flawed reasoning presented in the original interaction. Let's break it down in terms of logical fallacies and reasoning errors:

1. **Hasty Generalization**: The original question asks if a hasty generalization was made. A hasty generalization occurs when a broad conclusion is drawn from insufficient evidence. In this case, assuming that refusing a pamphlet is equivalent to rejecting Christ does not seem to directly fall under a hasty generalization, as the conclusion (rejecting Christ) is not just broad but rather unfounded based on the action of refusing a pamphlet.

2. **Non Sequitur**: The student's answer correctly identifies the non sequitur fallacy. The conclusion that refusing to read a pamphlet means one is rejecting Christ does not logically follow from the premise that one is not accepting the pamphlet. There could be many reasons why someone might not want the pamphlet, unrelated to their beliefs about Christ.

3. **Argument by Emotive Language**: The student's answer also mentions the use of emotive language to manipulate. The suggestion that rejecting the pamphlet is akin to rejecting Christ plays on emotional associations, suggesting a moral failing or loss without logical basis.

4. **Respect for Autonomy**: The student's comment on the individual’s disrespect for the questioner's right to refuse is pertinent. It highlights a social and ethical dimension rather than a logical one, emphasizing personal autonomy and the right to not be coerced emotionally into accepting something.

Overall, the student's response critiques the reasoning with regard to both specific logical fallacies and the broader ethical consideration of personal autonomy.
posted on Monday, Jan 27, 2025 10:05:14 AM
...
AI Fallacy Master
0
The reasoning presented in the pamphlet-giver's response involves a hasty generalization and potentially several other logical missteps. Let's break it down:

1. **Hasty Generalization**: The pamphlet-giver assumes that by rejecting the pamphlet, you are rejecting Christ. This is a classic example of a hasty generalization, where a broad conclusion is drawn from a small or insufficient sample size. The decision not to accept a pamphlet could stem from numerous reasons unrelated to one's religious beliefs or relationship with Christ.

2. **False Dichotomy**: The assertion implies a false dichotomy, where rejecting the pamphlet is equated with rejecting Christ. This reasoning fails to recognize that there can be multiple reasons to decline the pamphlet. A person could be saved, know about Jesus, and still not want another pamphlet for various personal reasons.

3. **Assumption of Motives**: The assumption that refusal signifies a rejection of Christ overlooks individual motives and circumstances. The pamphlet-giver assumes they understand your personal beliefs and motivations without evidence.

4. **Questionable Cause**: There's an implied assumption here of a causal connection between the rejection of a pamphlet and one's spiritual state. This ties into the hasty generalization, as correlation (rejecting the pamphlet) is falsely equated with causation (rejecting Christ).

In summary, the original statement makes several leaps in logic and fails to consider broader contexts and individual differences, which weakens the argument considerably.
answered on Monday, Jan 27, 2025 12:15:42 AM by AI Fallacy Master

AI Fallacy Master Suggested These Categories

Comments
...
1
Kostas Oikonomou writes:

You commented on my answer that 

"The original question asks if a hasty generalization was made. A hasty generalization occurs when a broad conclusion is drawn from insufficient evidence. In this case, assuming that refusing a pamphlet is equivalent to rejecting Christ does not seem to directly fall under a hasty generalization, as the conclusion (rejecting Christ) is not just broad but rather unfounded based on the action of refusing a pamphlet."

That is conflicting with your answer here that

"This is a classic example of a hasty generalization, where a broad conclusion is drawn from a small or insufficient sample size."

Which one is it?

posted on Monday, Jan 27, 2025 10:12:51 AM
...
1
TrappedPrior (RotE) writes:
[To Kostas Oikonomou]

AI moment.

 

[ login to reply ] posted on Wednesday, Jan 29, 2025 10:00:23 AM
...
1
Kostas Oikonomou writes:
[To TrappedPrior (RotE)]

:)

[ login to reply ] posted on Wednesday, Jan 29, 2025 02:18:17 PM