The error lies in making a general statement without qualifying it so that it appears to include all cases. By making a sweeping statement and expecting it to be true in every specific instance, the result is stereotyping. The problem is that the sweeping statement may be true in many cases, but it is not necessarily true in every case. Thus the conclusion would be invalid for those exceptions.
"Scientists are closed-minded. If something doesn't fit into one of their formulas or laws, they won't even consider it as being possible or even be willing to study it to find out the truth."
NB: Some scientists are closed-minded. Scientists are people and exhibit the same flaws as others, including non-scientists. Some non-scientists are closed-minded. Some people of faith are close-minded and so are some atheists. But scientists seem more often to be perceived as closed-minded than the general public. That is because they have been trained to be rational skeptics and expect a reasonable amount of evidence before believing something. This makes them appear to disbelieve more things than other people and unwilling to automatically accept any proposal that is put in front of them.
But many scientists are willing to explore new ideas and search for the explanations behind unknown things. That is what science does best - find answers to things that we don't understand. So there are scientists who are doing legitimate research and inquiry on some very strange topics like ghosts, crop circles, UFO's, the Bermuda Triangle, and in the field of cryptozoology. So declaring all scientists to be closed-minded is painting with a brush so wide that it destroys the credibility of the argument.
|Contemporary Media Examples|