I think you should use anecdotal evidence

100% Normal
7 Comments

I think it's actually dangerous for a society to completely dismiss anecdotal evidence from their decisions. This makes it very easy to control a population. Everyone wants a study now to prove a fact. I was talking to someone the other day who claims there is no behavioral differences between boys and girls before puberty. This is something that if you have spent time around kids you would know isnt true. Boys are often rowdy and play with different toys. This is noticeable even before the child is old enough to understand gender roles. He told me this is anecdotal evidence and he completely discounted it. So all you need to do to convince this person is get a professor from yale or harvard to write him a note. I wonder if the note said the sky was green if he would believe it.

Voting Results
100% Normal
Based on 1 vote
Help us keep this site organized and clean. Thanks!
[ Report Post ]
Comments ( 7 )
  • Yaidin
    1 year ago

    Those people are the pseudo intellectuals who think that having just one source is enough to discredit any argument. There are more than enough studies that show differences between boys and girls like you mentioned

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    1
    1
      -
    • Anonymous Post Author
      1 year ago

      Of course. I'm sure I could have spent an hour on google finding studies of this.

      But why? Do you really need a study for something that you observe every day and you know its true? If someone gave me a study that said there was no difference of behavior until puberty Id just laugh at it and go with my silly "anecdotal evidence".

      Comment Hidden ( show )
      0
      0
  • bbrown95
    1 year ago

    I agree. Not to mention that studies aren't always 100% accurate, and that certain ones, especially statistics, are very easy to manipulate. This isn't to say that they should be totally dismissed, but they aren't necessarily gospel, either. I think there is so much out there that we really don't know, and that experts' opinions will vastly change about in the future. It's already happened a lot.

    Though anecdotal evidence tends to be biased and isn't as easy to prove, it's your own "study" in a way, if you think about it. Of course it isn't "peer reviewed" or necessarily scientific, but it's your own observations of certain things.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    0
    0
  • dabadedabadie
    1 year ago

    Anecdotal evidence is worthless because you can't prove the events happened you just expect people to believe you.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    0
    0
      -
    • Anonymous Post Author
      1 year ago

      Worthless? I think you're missing the point. You knowing that the sky is blue is based purely on anecdotal evidence. You dont have to look at a study to know the sky is blue. You've seen it yourself. You dont need a study for EVERYTHING.

      Now hypothetically if someone gives you a study that says the sky is visibly red are you going to believe it?

      Comment Hidden ( show )
      0
      0
  • my_life_my_way
    1 year ago

    Anecdotal?

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    0
    0
      -
    • Anonymous Post Author
      1 year ago

      Yes, I always spell it wrong. Ive been corrected many times.

      Comment Hidden ( show )
      0
      0