Page 1 of 1 [ 4 posts ] 

onewithstrange
Sea Gull
Sea Gull

User avatar

Joined: 4 Mar 2013
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 209

23 May 2014, 1:48 pm

In general, men generally prefer women who are generally shorter and younger than they generally are. Generally, women generally prefer men taller and older than themselves. Also in general, this word sucks.
Could we stop using it? It perpetuates the fallacy of composition and gender stereotyping, two things this forum could use a little less of.


_________________
"If people do not believe that mathematics is simple, it is only because they do not realize how complicated life is."

~~ John von Neumann


InsainoMan
Butterfly
Butterfly

User avatar

Joined: 12 May 2014
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 10

23 May 2014, 2:34 pm

Pointing out correlations (you have noted two perfect examples), is perfectly valid. The fallacy of composition occurs when one assumes that that generalization applies to an individual (eg. assuming that Sally doesn't like you because you're short). To avoid falling for this fallacy, we need to understand that it is those assumptions which are unfounded, not bury our heads in the sand and pretend that the correlation doesn't exist. Now if you object that some observation is a hasty generalization, then make that objection known and argue that point.

Another objection to generalizations of this nature, is that they refer to socially constructed tendencies which our society would do better without, and that by pointing them out or using them to affect our actions, we perpetuate the destructive social construct. This argument, however, fails on two levels: Firstly, I believe that understanding, not ignorance, leads to social change. Secondly, I do not believe that our tendencies are wholly the result of social constructs. As with any nature vs. nurture question the answer is invariably both.



onewithstrange
Sea Gull
Sea Gull

User avatar

Joined: 4 Mar 2013
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 209

23 May 2014, 3:02 pm

InsainoMan wrote:
Pointing out correlations (you have noted two perfect examples), is perfectly valid.


What correlations? You can't count 'men' and 'women' as variables in a correlation without being guilty of generalizing, which is my point.

InsainoMan wrote:
The fallacy of composition occurs when one assumes that that generalization applies to an individual (eg. assuming that Sally doesn't like you because you're short). To avoid falling for this fallacy, we need to understand that it is those assumptions which are unfounded, not bury our heads in the sand and pretend that the correlation doesn't exist. Now if you object that some observation is a hasty generalization, then make that objection known and argue that point.


What you describe sounds more like the fallacy of division, the converse, which is still wrong because it makes a generalization to begin with. How about we just ask Sally what she likes instead of assuming it? Aren't we likely to get a more accurate result that way?


_________________
"If people do not believe that mathematics is simple, it is only because they do not realize how complicated life is."

~~ John von Neumann


LookingLost
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Nov 2011
Age: 30
Gender: Male
Posts: 592
Location: UK

23 May 2014, 3:44 pm

onewithstrange wrote:
which is still wrong because it makes a generalization to begin with. How about we just ask Sally what she likes instead of assuming it? Aren't we likely to get a more accurate result that way?


^ Forgive me if I'm wrong, but is that not what InsanioMan was suggesting?


_________________
Blackbird singing in the dead of night, take these broken wings and learn to fly...