Ad blocker interference detected!
Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers
Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.
Individual differences |
Methods | Statistics | Clinical | Educational | Industrial | Professional items | World psychology |
Philosophy Index: Aesthetics · Epistemology · Ethics · Logic · Metaphysics · Consciousness · Philosophy of Language · Philosophy of Mind · Philosophy of Science · Social and Political philosophy · Philosophies · Philosophers · List of lists
This fallacy has the following structure, and argument form:
- I know that X is such.
- Therefore, anything related to X is also such.
- I know that x, which is a member of group X, has the property P.
- Therefore, all other elements of X have the property P.
The following example demonstrates why this is a logical fallacy:
- I've seen a person shoot someone dead.
- Therefore, all people are murderers.
The flaw in this argument is very evident, but arguments of the same form can sometimes seem somewhat convincing, as in the following example:
- I've seen Gypsies steal. So, Gypsies must be thieves.
However, argument by example is valid when it leads from a singular premise to an existential conclusion. For example:
- Socrates is wise.
- Therefore, someone is wise.
- I've seen a person steal.
- Therefore, people can steal.
This is an informal version of the logical rule known as existential introduction (also known as particularisation or existential generalization).
- Existential Introduction
- Modus ponens
- Affirming the consequent
- Inductive reasoning
- Bayesian probability
- Proof by construction
- Anecdotal evidence
|This page uses Creative Commons Licensed content from Wikipedia (view authors).|