In Lincoln-Douglas debate, hasty generalization arguments are important because judges expect affirmatives to support the resolution as a whole rather than by using a small example. That is enough to support the resolution. Hasty generalization forces affirmatives to defend unnecessary aspects of the topic that they do not want to advocate. Hasty generalization allows only a few cases meaning debates will become boring and discourage research on specific cases. Hasty generalization rewards shallow research because teams are not rewarded for finding more specific information and advocacy.
Hasty generalization depends on an arbitrary line between the typical and the atypical.
Jim Thanks to xxx for this question.