(May 9, 2025 at 3:20 pm)John 6IX Breezy Wrote: I'll briefly explain. What people call evidence is structurally identical to affirming the consequent.Ohhh, johnny johnny johnny, you just used AI, comedy gold...
https://www.google.com/search?q=evidence...e&ie=UTF-8
Affirming the consequent is a logical fallacy, it has nothing to do with following the objective evidence, it has to do with misinterpreting it with subjective bias. For example, someone prays for X, X happens, they then claim the prayer cause X, that one is called a post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy.
Evidence
noun
1. the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid.
