3 ms·
Is there a classic fallacy for dismissing the best available evidence as a "classic fallacy?" It is impossible to prove a negative; the best we can do is repea
by loeg 3y ago
Is there a classic fallacy for dismissing the best available evidence as a "classic fallacy?" It is impossible to prove a negative; the best we can do is repeatedly fail to find evidence. So far all evidence points that way. GP's statement is reasonable and measured.
I don't think this subject's treatment is any "less rigorous" than anything else that gets discussed here. I believe you will find a mix of personal anecdote, opinions that are objectively contrary to best available evidence, and "rigorous" comments in most discussions here. This topic is not unique.
- mrangle 3y agoNon-sarcastic question: do you have a graduate science degree, in any field, and therefore were you taught how to evaluate evidence? Given that your post sentiment rests on the concept of "best evidence". I'm not trying to call you out nor embarrass you (nor assuming that I could). I'm trying to examine, and highlight if warranted, how terms are being thrown around. Understand that claimed status as best evidence, generally speaking, hasn't a direct relationship to whether or not research is quality evidence.