It is not uncommon to generalize certain things when they follow a pattern. When things tend to fall on expected lines, there is no point in raising our eyebrows. So, what is the general criteria of generalizing? Where is it that we can draw a line and say confidently that such and such a thing strikes a certain cord? There are certain things that can be determined easily from experience, and others from careful reasoning. Each of them should have a reasonable logic in justifying your conclusion.
Consider the example of our cricket team in the late nineties. The Indian team could never win its matches when Sachin Tendulkar was stiffled. It was a one man army breathing life into the team. The victories and defeats were by and large determined by the way he played the game. It was easy for us to generalize Indians cannot win without Sachin Tendulkar.
Consider a movie in which Shahrukh Khan is the actor and the Johar/Chopra family member directs the movie. Most of them were romantic flicks with 'absorbing' storylines. That prompted us to say Shahrukh Khan is Rahul in a Johar/Chopra movie.
They are just examples and it does not require a doctorate degree for us to say that all politicians are the same. Their main motto is to indulge in votebank politics through outrageous schemes that helps only their cause. There are many factors that can be attributed before we generalize and arrive at a conclusion. Of course, generalization can have its own exceptions. There can definitely be no denying the fact that though All X are generalized to be Y, there can be some X that are Z.
As my friend and I were discussing in the library, and as we pondered over different issues, he delivered a punchline Maga, the bottomline is this: Never marry a girl who has done her Masters in the United States. I was immediate to retort back Come On, you can't say that. What do you say about so and so? He was quick with the reply All Generalizations have exceptions. We closed the topic and my friend had the last laugh!
Consider the example of our cricket team in the late nineties. The Indian team could never win its matches when Sachin Tendulkar was stiffled. It was a one man army breathing life into the team. The victories and defeats were by and large determined by the way he played the game. It was easy for us to generalize Indians cannot win without Sachin Tendulkar.
Consider a movie in which Shahrukh Khan is the actor and the Johar/Chopra family member directs the movie. Most of them were romantic flicks with 'absorbing' storylines. That prompted us to say Shahrukh Khan is Rahul in a Johar/Chopra movie.
They are just examples and it does not require a doctorate degree for us to say that all politicians are the same. Their main motto is to indulge in votebank politics through outrageous schemes that helps only their cause. There are many factors that can be attributed before we generalize and arrive at a conclusion. Of course, generalization can have its own exceptions. There can definitely be no denying the fact that though All X are generalized to be Y, there can be some X that are Z.
As my friend and I were discussing in the library, and as we pondered over different issues, he delivered a punchline Maga, the bottomline is this: Never marry a girl who has done her Masters in the United States. I was immediate to retort back Come On, you can't say that. What do you say about so and so? He was quick with the reply All Generalizations have exceptions. We closed the topic and my friend had the last laugh!
You are indeed the right person to talk abt generalizations :-p
ReplyDelete