The arguer jumps to a general or blanket conclusion about members of a given group on the basis of an unrepresentative or insufficient number of cases. The form of the argument is: B1, B2, B3 are C; therefore all B is C. Selected instances and Hasty Generalization have much the same effect. There are important differences, however. Hasty Generalization typically occurs on an emotional basis, while Selected Instances is typically coldly calculating. In the former case there is, at the time at least, no awareness of opposed instances; in the latter case, there is. Selected Instances is not merely crooked thinking but dishonesty. On the surface the two are apt to look alike, and until we have evidence that the arguer is really deliberately closing his eyes to contradictory cases, we cannot label the technique as Selected Instances.