Hasty Generalization

One of the more common errors in reasoning and argument that people make is what philosophers call a “hasty generalization” or the “small sample fallacy.” That’s where you base your conclusion about something on insufficient evidence, or more typically, on just a single data point: your own personal experience.

So, for instance, just because you—or make that I—gag at the sound of Kenny G’s saxophone playing, I come to the conclusion that everybody should hate Kenny G (not in itself an unreasonable thing to conclude; point being simple that it’s fallacious to draw that conclusion based purely on my own reaction.)

Or, perhaps more commonly, just because when I do something—say have a couple beers and ride my bike—something else follows—say, I’m still able to ride without hardly being a menace to society or even myself—it’s illegitimate to conclude that others will behave in the same way, and even less legitimate to base decisions about public policy on that data.

But see, I’m doing the very same thing I’m complaining about right here: just because my experience of using my own experience to draw conclusions about other people tends to yield errors, doesn’t mean that’s the case for other people. Maybe most folks are more like most folks so that their experiences more closely mirror the norm.

Nevertheless, I think it’s pretty certain that it’s difficult to draw conclusions about how other people ought to act simply from investigating one’s own actions, or lack thereof.

That said, I still think it’s way past high time for Hillary to withdraw from the Democratic presidential nomination race. And not simply because if I were her, I would have done so long ago. (But of course if I were her, I wouldn’t have, because then I would be her, not me.)

In the end, all these counterfactuals make me very confused; but if they weren’t counterfactual, then, if I wasn’t confused, what would I have to write about?