3 ms·
Anecdotal evidence is better than no evidence - especially when there seems to be a large gap between what's studied and what's applied in practice. A quick sea
by m_mueller 10y ago
Anecdotal evidence is better than no evidence - especially when there seems to be a large gap between what's studied and what's applied in practice. A quick search on google scholar didn't reveal any papers trying to find the effects of different ways of letting 'normally abled' children play.
People seem to confuse healthy skepticism with "let me shoot down anything I don't like just by being skeptic, without any requirements for my own counter evidence". That's when skepticism isn't helpful anymore (and highly annoying to me).
Applied the way you did it, "grass is always greener" can be used for any comparison about anything between different cultures. So what you're saying is, American culture has nothing to learn from anywhere else, i.e. is the most perfect there is?
- Aelinsaar 10y agoAnecdotal evidence is better than nothing, worse than nothing, and is nothing. To your last bit however, no, I'm pretty sure that American culture is in desperate need of help, please don't make those kind of ridiculous assumptions about what I"m saying.
- m_mueller 10y agoAnecdotes give ideas. It led me on a short hunt trying to find some hard data on this question, coming back empty handed. If no one starts thinking about it, no one will go and start actual research about it. So, no, it's not nothing. It's only worse than nothing if there already is enough research about a topic.
- Aelinsaar 10y agoHopefully, if you're a thinking person, every stimulus "Gives ideas". What anecdote doesn't do, is provide us with evidence to support a given hypothesis with anything like rigor.