Note 1:

This fallacy is opposed to the fallacy of hasty generalization (to be discussed in the next episode) insofar as hasty generalization makes a generalization from unrepresentative or insufficient cases, while slothful induction is the failure to make a generalization justified by sufficient and representative cases.

Note 2:

The deductive version of this fallacy is the accident fallacy (also known as sweeping generalization), discussed in episode 55.

Example 1:

Hugo has had twelve accidents in the last six months, yet he insists that it is just a coincidence and not his fault.

The argument is a slothful induction because twelve accidents in six months is strong evidence of a common cause to the accidents that has to somehow involve Hugo, yet he claims that there is no common cause at all.

Example 2:

The polygamist has had twelve wives for twelve years but no children. Says he, “I just can’t imagine what is wrong with all those women!”

This is an example of slothful induction because children normally result from marriage and twelve wives for twelve years is sufficient to conclude that the absence of children has something to do with the man.

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.