In Chapter 8, Epstein mentions vague generalities. Vague generalities occur when we make a claim without specifying a precise number. Epstein says that these words are too vague to figure in valid argument. Most of these words are too ambiguous to be used in a claim. Some words that can make a vague claim are all, almost, many, most, a lot of, some, a few, and very few.
Example:
A lot of basketball players are tall
John is basketball player
So John is tall
The premise gives us good reason to make the claim. The problem is that the conclusion doesn’t follow with any exclusion. This is still al weak claim. We don’t know that john is tall just because a lot of basketball players are tall. It’s only a few occasions where a vague generality can make a strong argument. It would be better specify better in order to make the claim a valid claim.
The terms such as all, some, many, few and so on are important terms to understand when dealing with general claims and vague generalities. These terms are too vague to characterize this argument as valid. In order to make this a valid argument you would need to specify something about John or basketball and how they overlap one another. This argument is invalid because it is true that John is a basketball player, and a lot of basketball players are tall, although he may be a short basketball player. Like Nate Robinson in the NBA he is only 5'9" and is a good professional basketball player.
ReplyDeleteI definitely agree that vague generalities create weak arguments such as the one you stated. Your statement could have easily been corrected by adding more claims that were precise like:
ReplyDelete-John played center standing 7'2 tall
-John's other teammates ranged standing 5'11 to 6'6 feet tall
The conclusion you stated is also vague as it just states that he's tall, when there is no comparison to how tall he is. I think it would be best to say he is a tall player in the team so that your statement would be complete.