Evidence

From Iron Chariots Wiki
Revision as of 16:28, 22 May 2011 by Jt (Talk | contribs)
Jump to: navigation, search
Wikipedia-logo-en.png
For more information, see the Wikipedia article:
Wiktionary-logo-en.png
For more information, see the Wiktionary article:

Evidence is, in a general sense, anything used to support an assertion. The standards used to determine what sort of evidence is acceptable can vary, depending on the situation.

What may qualify as evidence in a casual argument might not qualify in a formal debate, legal proceeding or scientific investigation. Hearsay, for example, is often used in casual conversation to support a claim, but it isn't permissible in most courtrooms. In science, evidence is usually expected to be empirically observable and repeatable. Additionally, if a piece of evidence implicates more than one cause, additional evidence should be presented to exclude the other possibilities. Scientific experimentation depends on the analysis of many observations in order to determine consistent patterns and to reduce elements of chance or uncertainty. Any claims, or hypotheses, derived from observations must be falsifiable if disconfirming evidence is observed.

Counter-apologetics

When skeptics object to apologist's claims on the basis of insufficient evidence, they're generally referring to a lack of scientific evidence or a preponderance of anecdotal evidence. For any given claim, there exists a burden of proof which must be supported by evidence. The defining characteristic of the required evidence rests in its quality, not quantity.

If, for example, someone claims "God answered my prayer" that is both an assertion (of a specific occurrence) and evidence for the general assertions about the existence of God and the efficacy of prayer. Unfortunately, the quality of that evidence is exceptionally low. So low, in fact, that such a claim is only considered evidence in the very broad, definitional sense. Anecdotal evidence and bald assertions have no evidentiary value and serve only as additional claims.

Suppose that 2.5 million people all testified, "God answered my prayer". The sheer quantity of evidence is sufficient to warrant an investigation of the claims, but the testimonies still don't qualify as sufficient evidence to support acceptance of the claim. Increasing the quantity of claims doesn't increase the quality.

Apologists commonly make claims supported by anecdotal evidence, hoping that the sheer quantity will be sufficiently convincing. Unfortunately, this tactic is often effective and claims like, "80% of the population believes in God — they can't all be wrong" can be very convincing to those who don't critically examine the claim. This argument works because people are reluctant to write off that 80% as delusional, stupid or insane. (See Argumentum ad populum.)

The truth is that they most definitely can be wrong. At some point in human history, the overwhelming majority believed that the Earth was the center of the universe. That majority was wrong. They weren't necessarily delusional, stupid or insane; they were simply ignorant of the facts and wrong.

External link


v · d Science
v · d General science
Scientific method   Scientific theory · Hypothesis · Evidence · Examining claims · Skepticism
Scientific Disciplines   Physics · Biology · Chemistry · Psychology · Medical Science · Mathematics
History of science   Library of Alexandria · Aristotle · Dark ages · Renaissance · The enlightenment · Heliocentrism · Newtonian physics · Darwinian evolution · Mendelian genetics · Relativity Theory · Quantum mechanics · Space exploration · Computer sciences · String theory
Champions of reason   Carl Sagan · Karl Kruszelnicki · Julius Sumner Miller · John Allan Paulos · James Randi
v · d Biology
Evolution   Overview of genetics · Genetic mutation · Hereditary change · Natural selection · Adaptation
Abiogenesis   Possible theories of abiogenesis · Building blocks of life · The Urey-Miller experiment
Evolutionary straw men   Life just exploded from nothing · So you think we came from monkeys · How did the first dog find a mate · Crocoducks · Banana argument · 747 Junkyard argument · Irreducible complexity · Chuck Missler's jar of peanut butter · What good is half a wing?
Notable Biologists   Charles Darwin · Alfred Russel Wallace · Thomas Huxley · Gregor Mendel · Stanley Miller · Norman Borlaug · Richard Lenski · Jerry Coyne · Richard Dawkins · PZ Myers
Notable quacks   William Dembski · Michael Behe · Geoffrey Simmons · Ken Ham · Michael Cremo
v · d Physics
Cosmology   Big bang · Relativity theory · The cosmos · Black holes
Quantum mechanics   Heisenberg Principle · Schrödinger's cat · Atomic decay
Physics straw men   Fine-tuning argument · Anthropic principle · Quantum mechanics and free will · Quantum mechanics and the after life · Quantum mechanics and Naturopathy · Something can't come from nothing
Notable Physicists   Plato · Isaac Newton · Albert Einstein · Maxwell Plank · Niels Bohr · Werner Heisenberg · Richard Feynman · Erwin Schrödinger · Freeman Dyson · Roger Penrose · Neil deGrasse Tyson · Stephen Hawking · Micho Kaku
Notable Quacks   Dinesh D'Souza · Ray Comfort
v · d Mathematics
Mathematics   Overview of mathematics · Numbers in reality · History of numbers
Statistics   Sample size · Selection bias · Data mining · Standard divination · Statistical significance · Statistical probability · Meta probability · Gambler's fallacy
Mathematics in nature   Golden ratio · Golden spiral · Fibonacci sequence
Mathematics and religion   Biblical value of pi · Noah's flood
Personal tools
Namespaces
Variants
Actions
wiki navigation
IronChariots.Org
Toolbox