Is stereotyping people a strong, logical and valid way to win an argument?

Question

If I see a man with a red baseball hat rob a local bank, is it logical and accurate to say that "All men that wear red baseball hats are bank robbers?" If I see a group of church ladies with an average age of 62 playing bingo, is it fair and accurate to say that all church ladies who are 62 play bingo? If I see 100 senior citizens arrive by bus to a Las Vegas Casino, can I logically say "All senior citizens are gamblers?" If I see a group of college students skipping their morning history class, can I say all college students skip their classes?

It is amazing how the radio talk show hosts and the politicians from both parties have convinced intelligent Americans that stereotyping people is a valid and logical way to argue a point.

Answer 1

It's strong, in that the human psyche has a natural tendency to find similarities, and thus it is very effective to categorize.

It's valid, from their perspective, because it accomplishes their goals. If they (they = people who rely on stereotypes) can get people to accept the stereotype and talk about the stereotype, then they have already won half the argument.

It's not logical (even if it is effective) because rarely do the stereotypes accurately represent the overall category. Usually, the stereotypes are skewed to prove the point, which makes them useless if the issues are evaluated in depth.

Answer 2

I, too, am constantly amazed at this. You do, of course, know the answer.

Where, oh where, have all the thinking people gone. It seems to me, that most of the Q&A on here in the past few days has been Qs with the As embedded - so, not really Qs at all.

Stereotyping is not valid for anything - except, apparently, winning elections and swaying uninformed voters. Oh, and getting others to do your dirty work.

Maybe we'll see some real discussions of the issues before the elections, eh?

Answer 3

In modern america yes. But I disagree that they are convincing "intelligent" americans. Avg IQ is 100 - meaning half are above, and half are below. And the redsters tend to fall into the latter category.

Answer 4

You make some great points. Generalizing is a useful short-hand tool that help illustrate a point (for example, the elderly tend to see doctors more than young people; women tend to want to get married more than men), but when taken too far it usually leads to irrational conclusions.

Answer 5

Logically, it's fallacious. Yet it works.