62. Misleading Vividness

Misleading vividness is a fallacy that is committed by describing an occurrence in sufficient detail to encourage a hasty generalization about the occurrence. That is, the vivid description persuades the listener that the occurrence is representative of a widespread problem. The fallacy is in the creation of such a misleading impression from a case that is unrepresentative or insufficient to generalize from.

Note:

Misleading vividness is similar to the appeals to emotion that we will discuss in later episodes but with the difference that it acts in combination with hasty generalization, and it creates its effect by piling on details about the case. By contrast, an appeal to emotion need not involve hasty generalization and may be lacking in detail.

Example 1:

Anne: I am giving up extreme sports now that I have children. I think I will take up golf.

Bill: I wouldn’t do that. Do you remember Charles? He was playing golf when he got hit by a golf-cart. It broke his leg, and he fell over, giving himself a concussion. He was in hospital for a week and still walks with a limp. I would stick to paragliding!

Example 2:

Tom: I’m planning to go on vacation in Mexico.

Dick: Oh, I certainly wouldn’t go there. You know Tim? He visited Mexico and his trip was a disaster. He got robbed, beat up so badly that he was on crutches for two months, had to pay bribes everwhere he went and then caught this horrible disease called giardia.

Tom: I’d better not go there after all.

or play..

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>