Appeal: hasty generalisation
From Ryad TRIGGERS Miami Girls After Saying THIS... 2026-10-19 22:20.
- #260643:07upheld a speaker not yet confirmed psogos: hasty generalisation (+2) tempered from flagrant to major
The council upheld the call: a speaker not yet confirmed gave away 2 points.
“… it's women that are actually the big narcissist…”
Diogenes: He draws a claim about all women from two women on this stream, S23's refusal to obey and S26's misuse of "narcissist," and adds "most women don't know the definition of narcissism" with no further support.major: This repeats the same move already called at 41:34, now with a larger claim, and the generalisation about women is the core of his case.
The bench graded it major (Aristotle, Plato); the referee had flagrant.
- Aristotle uphold: On the record: S20 declared nothing at the opening; he joined late, pressed the girls on equality and headship, then held that women cannot substantiate claims, and the called line extends that same generalisation rather than departing from it. He moves from S23's refusal to obey and S26's misuse of "narcissist" to "it's women that are actually the big narcissist" and "most women don't know the definition", with nothing more offered for the general claim. All three elements of hasty generalisation are present. Flagrant is fair because he repeats the generalisation and it carries his case. The earlier ruling at 41:34 is consistent with this one.
- Socrates uphold: Read blind, found "hasty generalisation". S20 draws a claim about women as a group from a few cases: one woman who called her ex a narcissist and could not say why, and a refusal to obey a protective man. He offers nothing more to show the claim holds generally. It is the same move I found at 41:34, now with a new group-wide label.
- Plato uphold: On the record: S20 never opened with a thesis of his own; from 33:15 he pressed S23 on equality and obedience, and from 40:34 he held that women cannot substantiate claims. "It's women that are actually the big narcissist" is that same line carried further, so it does not depart from his position. All three elements are present. He makes a general claim about women as a group. He draws it from two cases named in the debate: S23's refusal to obey and S26's use of "narcissist." He offers nothing more for it, and he adds "most women don't know the definition of narcissism" with no support. He does not offer a counterexample, and the claim is not a modest one. Flagrant is high, but the sweeping claim is central to his case and repeats the earlier generalisation at 41:34.
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.