A letter to the editor argues: "My neighbor's son and two of his friends quit the soccer program after one season. Clearly, the city's youth sports programs are failing our children and should be defunded." Which weakness most undermines this argument?
Show answer & explanation
Answer: B
It relies on emotional language instead of any example at all: Wrong. The letter does give an example. The problem is that the example is far too small to support the conclusion.
It draws a broad conclusion from a very small, unrepresentative sample: Correct. This is a hasty generalization: three players quitting one program cannot show that all city youth sports are failing.
It attacks the character of the program's coaches instead of the facts: Wrong. That would be an ad hominem attack, and the letter does not criticize anyone's character.
It assumes that one event must have caused a later, unrelated event: Wrong. That describes a post hoc (false cause) fallacy. The main flaw here is overgeneralizing from too little evidence.
Check whether the evidence is sufficient and representative. A few anecdotes cannot support a sweeping claim (hasty generalization).