The sentence displays a form of the logical fallacy known as "hasty generalization." This fallacy occurs when a conclusion is drawn about a whole group based on insufficient or biased evidence. In this case, the argument suggests that because plastic bottle caps aren't recyclable, it somehow undermines the value of recycling any plastic at all. This overlooks the fact that many other types of plastic are recyclable, and it assumes that one example reflects the entire category of plastic recycling.
It turns out that plastic bottle caps aren't recyclable, so what's the use of recycling any plastic?
Which type of logical fallacy is used in the sentence?
1 answer