“All generalizations are dangerous!" someone said. You don’t say? Even that one? After all, “all generalizations are…” is a generalization. Saying this is like sawing off the limb you’re standing on, kind of like the pot calling the kettle, "black."
Q: Are generalizations dangerous?
A: They can be, but they can also be helpful.
When Jesus condemned the Pharisees (Mt. 23), He didn’t pause to point out the exceptions though there were some. For example, Nicodemus was a Pharisee, but exempt from the accusations of Jesus’ generalization. He was exceptional precisely because he agreed with the generalization and differentiated himself from it.
“When Mr. Wells says (as he did somewhere), ‘All chairs are quite different,’ he utters not merely a misstatement, but a contradiction in terms. If all chairs were quite different, you could not call them ‘all chairs.’” — G.K. Chesterton, The Suicide of Thought
All that to say, generalizations are necessary. So, when one asserts, “all generalizations are dangerous,” they do so assuming that both danger and generalizations are generally bad. They cannot make their point without generalizing. all danger bad? One could easily retort “Are all dangers bad? Are any good or worth it? Is all risk too risky? Says who?” Depends who is danger and why.
No comments:
Post a Comment