Appeal: hasty generalisation
From Ryad TRIGGERS Miami Girls After Saying THIS... 2026-10-19 22:20.
- #260541:34upheld a speaker not yet confirmed psogos: hasty generalisation (+2)
The council upheld the call: a speaker not yet confirmed gave away 2 points.
“And honestly, only women do this by the way, FYI. Only women do this…”
Diogenes: From a single case, S26 calling an ex a narcissist and not explaining why, S20 concludes that women as a group cannot "critically think" and that men "live in a world of logic and reasoning and rationale," and offers nothing further for the generality.major: The sweeping claim about all women is the whole of his conclusion and rests on one exchange, so it affects the argument clearly.
- Aristotle uphold: On the record: S20 declared nothing at the opening; he joined late, pressing the girls on equality and headship, and then held that women cannot substantiate their claims, so the called line is consistent with that and is the generalisation itself. S20 draws a claim about all women ("only women do this", "women don't" live in logic) from one exchange with S26 about a narcissist. He offers nothing more for it and does not ask for any. The three elements are met: a general claim about a group, one case, and nothing further for its generality.
- Socrates uphold: Read blind, found "hasty generalisation". S20 draws a sweeping claim about all women (and none of the men) from one woman's failure to explain why she called her ex a narcissist, and offers nothing more for its generality. The claim that men always explain themselves is asserted with no support, and the debate itself shows men not explaining their reasons: S1 says "we just do something because God says to do it."
- Plato uphold: On the record: S20 is not the speaker on record (S1, who defends Islamic headship and obedience to God's command); S20 here argues that women cannot substantiate claims, and in the preceding minutes said "Women are fucking stupid", which is consistent with the stance S1/S22 holds on male leadership, and the called line generalises from one exchange. All elements are present. S20 states a general claim about a group ("only women do this"). It rests on one case, S26 calling an ex a narcissist without substantiating it. He offers nothing more for the generality and goes on to say men live in "a world of logic and reasoning". It is a clear hasty generalisation, and the major severity fits because the whole rant rests on it.
Appeal this callout
Appeals come only from the debaters themselves. Sign in with Google to start; you'll then prove which debater you are, once.