In terms of logical reasoning, what does it mean when arguments are based on individual cases to support broad claims?

When arguments are based on individual cases to support broad claims, this refers to the logical fallacy known as hasty generalization. This fallacy occurs when someone draws a conclusion based on insufficient or unrepresentative evidence. For instance, if someone hears about one negative experience with a certain brand of car and concludes that all cars from that brand are poor quality, they are making a hasty generalization.

In logical reasoning, making broad claims based on limited examples can lead to misconceptions and inaccurate conclusions, as it fails to consider the full spectrum of evidence that might provide a more balanced perspective. The essence of hasty generalization lies in the overreach from specific instances to general rules without adequate support, which can mislead audiences and promote flawed reasoning.

Understanding this concept can help in evaluating arguments more critically, ensuring that claims are substantiated by a representative set of data rather than selective anecdotes.