Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth
Generally speaking, I avoid generalizations. Is this actually logical or is it a Yogi-ism type statement?
|
To play the straight man in the joke here...
A statement that is a claim to fact is true or false. To be true, it must be true in all instances it declares. A generalization usually differs from an absolute statement in that the speaker knows it is not actually true and so removes the "all". "All police cars have sirens" is an absolute statement to fact (and a false one), "police cars have sirens" is its generalized form that removes the direct declarative, because it isn't always true and thus, technically, is false, but would be true in most solitary cases and thus it is implied to be "all" while leaving the speaker the wiggle room to not have to account for those that do not.
"I don't use generalizations" would be a claim to fact.
"I avoid generalizations" is a statement that essentially means nothing from an Aristotelian perspective, as a generalization. "Avoid" signifies an opinion that the speaker does not like them and prefers a choice, rather than a real claim to fact, and it's meaning directly leaves room to still use them sometimes. "I avoid generalizations" is a carefully phrased expression of a generalization that has shifted from a formulation that is a claim of fact to an opinion that can be neither right nor wrong.
As it is a generalization in its structure already, the "generally speaking" prefix serves no purpose beyond the comedic, and thus creates a yogi-ism, a line defined by its absurdity and not meant to be taken seriously.
You are all welcome for the most boring post of the day.