Unjustified Generalization

[DISCLAIMER]

Photo credit, fair use

When providing psychoeducational lessons on Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy (REBT), I encourage people to consider use of thinking that is rational (in accordance with both logic and reason). To illustrate what I mean, I invite you to review the following categorical syllogism:

Form –

Premise 1: All x are z.

Premise 2: All y are z.

Conclusion: Therefore, all y are x.

Example –

Premise 1: All dogs are mammals.

Premise 2: All cats are mammals.

Conclusion: Therefore, all cats are dogs.

Both premises of this syllogism are true propositions, though the conclusion of the syllogism is false. Thus, the ultimate proposition of this syllogism is invalid. When using syllogisms, one’s objective is to determine the truth or fallacy of an argument, proposition, belief, and so forth.

Reviewing the invalid “cats are dogs” proposition, I note that each of the premises and resulting conclusion follow logical form. This is often how automatic thoughts and beliefs function. Yet, these cognitive propositions frequently aren’t reasonable. Thus, collectively, they aren’t rational.

Noteworthy, the cat-dog syllogism used herein represents a non sequitur—a statement (such as a response) that does not follow logically from or is not clearly related to anything previously said. As you likely understand, all cats aren’t dogs even though both of these species are mammals.

Moreover, this syllogism is an unjustified generalization—a broad conclusion drawn based on insufficient or unrepresentative evidence. Sometimes, this sort of generalization is referred to as hasty generalization, overgeneralization, or faulty generalization, about which one source states:

A faulty generalization is an informal fallacy wherein a conclusion is drawn about all or many instances of a phenomenon on the basis of one or a few instances of that phenomenon. It is similar to a proof by example in mathematics. It is an example of jumping to conclusions. For example, one may generalize about all people or all members of a group from what one knows about just one or a few people:

·  If one meets a rude person from a given country X, one may suspect that most people in country X are rude.

·  If one sees only white swans, one may suspect that all swans are white.

Expressed in more precise philosophical language, a fallacy of defective induction is a conclusion that has been made on the basis of weak premises, or one which is not justified by sufficient or unbiased evidence.

When a syllogism has a faulty conclusion from valid premises, using unjustified generalization, the consequences of actions following irrational propositions can be quite significant. Let us now turn from the silly cat-dog example toward a syllogism pertaining to a recently observed trend.

First, I’ll offer a bit of context. According to one source, “Hundreds of people have been deported to El Salvador’s mega-prison because of their tattoos. It’s not the first time tattoos have been weaponized against immigrants.” Now, let’s examine an irrational syllogism:

Form –

Premise 1: All x are y.

Premise 2: z is x.

Conclusion: Therefore, z is y.

Example –

Premise 1: All tattooed people from South America are gang members.

Premise 2: Juan is a tattooed person from South America.

Conclusion: Therefore, Juan is a gang member.

This unjustified generalization may seem obnoxiously implausible. However, it’s precisely the sort or irrational rhetoric currently being used by the Trump administration in order to justify the mass deportation of people to areas from which they don’t originate and into incarceration.

Make no mistake about my stance. I’m no bleeding heart liberal that wants to allow people who unlawfully immigrated to the United States during the Biden administration to remain in the country. Thus, I advocate deporting people who merely entered the country illegally.

Regarding these deportations which have occurred and that haven’t been fueled by unjustified generalization, I stated in a blogpost entitled Histrionics, “So far, regarding Trump’s approach, one may suggest, “Gotta pump those numbers up. Those are rookie numbers in this racket.”

Yet, rather than using rhetoric of an invalid, irrational, or faulty nature – such as that relating to unjustified generalization regarding a person’s ambiguous tattoos, I advocate use of valid, rational, and unfaulty arguments, propositions, beliefs, and so forth.

If you’re looking for a provider who tries to work to help understand how thinking impacts physical, mental, emotional, and behavioral elements of your life—helping you to sharpen your critical thinking skills, I invite you to reach out today by using the contact widget on my website.

As a psychotherapist, I’m pleased to try to help people with an assortment of issues ranging from anger (hostility, rage, and aggression) to relational issues, adjustment matters, trauma experience, justice involvement, attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, anxiety and depression, and other mood or personality-related matters.

At Hollings Therapy, LLC, serving all of Texas, I aim to treat clients with dignity and respect while offering a multi-lensed approach to the practice of psychotherapy and life coaching. My mission includes: Prioritizing the cognitive and emotive needs of clients, an overall reduction in client suffering, and supporting sustainable growth for the clients I serve. Rather than simply trying to help you to feel better, I want to try to help you get better!

Deric Hollings, LPC, LCSW

References:

Dholakia, N. (2025, May 6). People are being deported because of their tattoos. Vera Institute of Justice. Retrieved from https://www.vera.org/news/people-are-being-deported-because-of-their-tattoos

Hollings, D. (2024, November 24). Automatic thoughts and beliefs. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/automatic-thoughts-and-beliefs

Hollings, D. (2022, March 15). Disclaimer. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/disclaimer

Hollings, D. (2023, September 8). Fair use. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/fair-use

Hollings, D. (2024, May 17). Feeling better vs. getting better. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/feeling-better-vs-getting-better-1

Hollings, D. (2023, October 12). Get better. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/get-better

Hollings, D. (2025, January 29). Histrionics. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/histrionics

Hollings, D. (n.d.). Hollings Therapy, LLC [Official website]. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/

Hollings, D. (2023, September 19). Life coaching. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/life-coaching

Hollings, D. (2023, January 8). Logic and reason. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/logic-and-reason

Hollings, D. (2022, October 16). Non sequitur. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/non-sequitur

Hollings, D. (2023, April 24). On truth. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/on-truth

Hollings, D. (2024, January 1). Psychoeducation. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/psychoeducation

Hollings, D. (2024, May 5). Psychotherapist. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/psychotherapist

Hollings, D. (2022, March 24). Rational emotive behavior therapy (REBT). Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/rational-emotive-behavior-therapy-rebt

Hollings, D. (2024, December 5). Reasoning. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/reasoning

Hollings, D. (2024, January 20). Reliability vs. validity. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/reliability-vs-validity

Hollings, D. (2023, October 17). Syllogism. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/syllogism

Hollings, D. (2025, February 28). To try is my goal. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/to-try-is-my-goal

IGN. (2013, December 20). The Wolf of Wall Street – “You Jerk Off?” clip [Video]. YouTube. Retrieved from https://youtu.be/aSn1g-6h1OQ?si=xWFwiGLQsebNASqL

Macur, J. (2025, May 8). Trump has made claims about Abrego Garcia’s tattoos. Here’s a closer look. The New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2025/05/08/us/kilmar-abrego-garcia-tattoos-ms-13.html

ParsleyandCumin. (2024). I tried explaining the plot of the CatDog movie to AI [Image]. Reddit. Retrieved from https://www.reddit.com/r/aiArt/comments/1cexu9k/i_tried_explaining_the_plot_of_the_catdog_movie/

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Donald Trump. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Faulty generalization. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faulty_generalization

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Joe Biden. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Biden