When concluding that a person is well-mannered because they belong to a respected group, what reasoning category does this belong to?

The reasoning being employed when concluding that a person is well-mannered because they belong to a respected group is an example of the composition fallacy. This fallacy occurs when one assumes that what is true for a group as a whole must also be true for each individual within that group.

In this specific case, the argument suggests that because the group is respected, all its members, including the individual in question, must exhibit the characteristics associated with that respect, such as good manners. This is a flawed line of reasoning because the attributes of the group do not necessarily apply to every single member. The respected status of the group does not guarantee that each individual conforms to the qualities that group is known for, which is why this reasoning falls under the composition fallacy. This reinforces the importance of evaluating individuals based on their own merits rather than making assumptions based on group affiliations.