|
|
Inductive Hyperbole |
| Description: | ||
|
||
| The argument draws a conclusion that is stated more strongly than the evidence actually supports. | ||
|
|
||
| Comments: | ||
|
||
| This may include overstating the significance of findings and overstating the degree of certainty we can claim, as well as merely exaggerating the nature of the phenomenon we are observing. | ||
|
|
||
| Examples: | ||
| "Many hospitals have had to raise their rates recently. Medical costs are sky-rocketing out of control!" | ||
| "These findings that modest alcohol consumption can be beneficial for the heart completely upset all our previous assumptions about the health effects of drinking." | ||
|
|
||
| Discussion: | ||
| Over-enthusiastic statements of any kind might be called "hyperbole." The fallacy of Inductive Hyperbole refers specifically to over-inflated claims based on inductive sampling. This is a particularly important type of hyperbole, since it is very common in science reporting. Science reporters try to make articles on science interesting to the general public. Since they assume the general public will be bored with the caution and uncertainty that marks careful (and appropriate) use of the scientific method, they are strongly tempted to "hype" their topic to make it more interesting. This often results in over-enthusiastic reports on "breakthroughs" in science. Scientists themselves are often embarrassed by such effusive overstatements of the importance of their work. | ||
|
|
| Classification: An Error in Observation (an inductive fallacy of soundness with a falsehood in the major premiss). | ||
|
||
| Source: Various contemporary writers use the term 'hyperbole', but applying the term to the common practice of over-stating the significance of inductive studies was my own idea. | ||
|
||
Go to: WELCOME EXPLANATION of PRINCIPLES TABLE of FALLACIES EXERCISES INDEX