Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: December 11, 2024, 4:20 pm

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence
RE: Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence
Let's see if a hypothetical might illustrate this.

Say you're walking home tonight across a muddy field and you see a trail of hoofprints. Nothing else is evident, no other sign or cause. What is the most plausible explanation?

A) Horse
B) Zebra
C) Unicorn

More importantly, what is the minimum standard of evidence you would accept for each of these?
At the age of five, Skagra decided emphatically that God did not exist.  This revelation tends to make most people in the universe who have it react in one of two ways - with relief or with despair.  Only Skagra responded to it by thinking, 'Wait a second.  That means there's a situation vacant.'
Reply
RE: Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence
(November 9, 2015 at 11:52 am)Stimbo Wrote: Let's see if a hypothetical might illustrate this.

Say you're walking home tonight across a muddy field and you see a trail of hoofprints. Nothing else is evident, no other sign or cause. What is the most plausible explanation?

A) Horse
B) Zebra
C) Unicorn

More importantly, what is the minimum standard of evidence you would accept for each of these?

My assumption would be a horse (neither zebras nor unicorns are common in this area).  Beyond that, I would look to others for a more detailed evaluation. (is there even a difference between horse, zebra and unicorn hoof prints?) I would look at if they are knowledgeable on the subject, are there contrary views to be accounted for, and do they site and base their claim on the evidence.

The minimum standard of evidence would be sufficient to demonstrate the claim, and rule out the others.  I'm doubtful that your hoof prints would suffice.
Reply
RE: Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence
(October 25, 2015 at 11:21 pm)RoadRunner79 Wrote: Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence:


What an extraordinary thing to say.  I hope you can back that up.
Reply
RE: Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence
(November 9, 2015 at 12:34 pm)RoadRunner79 Wrote: My assumption would be a horse (neither zebras nor unicorns are common in this area).  Beyond that, I would look to others for a more detailed evaluation. (is there even a difference between horse, zebra and unicorn hoof prints?) I would look at if they are knowledgeable on the subject, are there contrary views to be accounted for, and do they site and base their claim on the evidence.

The minimum standard of evidence would be sufficient to demonstrate the claim, and rule out the others.  I'm doubtful that your hoof prints would suffice.

The point is that, were somebody to be with you and claim that a horse or zebra made those tracks, you would not need to first determine whether horses or zebras are possible. It's not an extraordinary claim because it is, itself, supported in some measure. With zebras there would be an additional set of criteria that would need to be fulfilled (are there zebras in the area? If not usually, how did one get here? etc) because that claim is slightly more extraordinary than the baseline experience of your standard western person.

When it comes to unicorns though, now there's a lot more work to do, because the existence of unicorns is not a given, nor are a series of other questions about their characteristics that would need to be asked before we could take the claim that they made hoof prints in this specific area of the world seriously. It is a claim for which none of the basic premises have been demonstrated, making it extraordinary in that it currently contravenes our understanding of the world, and you'd have extra legwork to do getting the claim demonstrated. Hell, even if we did literally find a horse with a horn making those tracks there would be additional investigation needed, both in terms of what was meant by "unicorn" in the original claim, and in terms of the nature of the creature, because they still might not line up right.

Like it or not, there is additional necessary evidence required for extraordinary claims versus mundane ones, because you can't just skip the baseline demonstration of possibility to get to a given conclusion, and you also can't just take a phenomenon as evidence of its cause: you would actually need to demonstrate that any given supernatural claim comes from an actual supernatural cause, and if you had evidence of that it would be extraordinary indeed, and would certainly require more work than regular evidence would.
"YOU take the hard look in the mirror. You are everything that is wrong with this world. The only thing important to you, is you." - ronedee

Want to see more of my writing? Check out my (safe for work!) site, Unprotected Sects!
Reply
RE: Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence
(November 9, 2015 at 4:15 am)robvalue Wrote: If you're talking about science, you don't need this phrase at all. Any claim must make specific testable and falsifiable predictions. This is where anything to do with religion falls down instantly because it makes no such things.

Actually, different branches of science, say medicine and physics, may use different standards.

It comes back to what I was saying about the statistics of type I and type II errors. Extraordinary claim means one where there is no plausible mechanism of action, or none at all. For example, ESP. Extraordinary evidence is quantified in terms of the statistical likelihood of getting the same results by chance instead of cause and effect. For ESP, you would use tighter standards.
[Image: extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg]
Reply
RE: Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence
(November 9, 2015 at 12:34 pm)RoadRunner79 Wrote: My assumption would be a horse (neither zebras nor unicorns are common in this area).  Beyond that, I would look to others for a more detailed evaluation. (is there even a difference between horse, zebra and unicorn hoof prints?) I would look at if they are knowledgeable on the subject, are there contrary views to be accounted for, and do they site and base their claim on the evidence.

The minimum standard of evidence would be sufficient to demonstrate the claim, and rule out the others.  I'm doubtful that your hoof prints would suffice.

In other words, your default assumption would be to the mundane explanations first until more extraordinary ones can be demonstrated. Moreover, you recognise that those extraordinary options require stronger evidence. That's all ECREE means.
At the age of five, Skagra decided emphatically that God did not exist.  This revelation tends to make most people in the universe who have it react in one of two ways - with relief or with despair.  Only Skagra responded to it by thinking, 'Wait a second.  That means there's a situation vacant.'
Reply
RE: Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence
(November 9, 2015 at 12:59 pm)Esquilax Wrote:


I suppose that is where I differ. If the evidence points to a zebra making the prints and eliminates a horse or other animal. I am going to consider that evidence to indicate a zebra is in the area and making those prints (even if a zebra cannot be shown to be in the area). I'm not going to require additional evidence to make that proclamation. Although I may question a single point of evidence in general (we could be mistaken on a single instance, but multiple points of evidence pointing to the same thing is less likely to be in error).

In the case of a unicorn, I am likely going to (similar to yourself), ask how they know it is a unicorn and what they are basing their claims on. And again I am going to look for multiple sources of confirmation. In the case of a horse or zebra, I may be more likely to assume the person knows what they are talking about (given credentials or seeming to be knowledgeable on the subject). It's not that less evidence is required in one instance over the other, rather; I am more willing to make assumptions, and take things on faith.
Reply
RE: Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence
Jorm: Sure, you're right, statistical analysis would be a little different. It's never possible anyway to prove a theory correct with 100% certainty, only that it appears true beyond reasonable doubt.

In the case of ESP and bullshit like that, the claim would be something like the probability of guessing which card the person is holding is higher than just guessing. I agree it's not the same as making a specific prediction. Good point!

It still has to be testable and falsifiable though, although the parameters for success have to be carefully chosen like you say.

RR: Can you give us one single example to indicate what the point of this thread is? Because I still don't get it.

Are you saying if several people said they saw a unicorn, you'd believe them?
Feel free to send me a private message.
Please visit my website here! It's got lots of information about atheism/theism and support for new atheists.

Index of useful threads and discussions
Index of my best videos
Quickstart guide to the forum
Reply
RE: Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence
(November 9, 2015 at 1:35 pm)RoadRunner79 Wrote: And again I am going to look for multiple sources of confirmation.
Depends on the quality of the sources as well. Multiple sources "confirm" that people have been kidnapped by extraterrestrial aliens. But so what? Doesn't make it likely true.
Reply
RE: Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence
Indeed. There's a reason science doesn't accept anecdotal evidence, which is that it's shit.

If you're proposing that science should start accepting it, then I'm afraid that's a dead end.
Feel free to send me a private message.
Please visit my website here! It's got lots of information about atheism/theism and support for new atheists.

Index of useful threads and discussions
Index of my best videos
Quickstart guide to the forum
Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
Video Neurosurgeon Provides Evidence Against Materialism Guard of Guardians 41 6104 June 17, 2019 at 10:40 pm
Last Post: vulcanlogician
  The Philosophy of Mind: Zombies, "radical emergence" and evidence of non-experiential Edwardo Piet 82 15165 April 29, 2018 at 1:57 am
Last Post: bennyboy
  Testimony is Evidence RoadRunner79 588 136660 September 13, 2017 at 8:17 pm
Last Post: Astonished
  Is the statement "Claims demand evidence" always true? Mudhammam 268 42287 February 3, 2017 at 6:44 pm
Last Post: WisdomOfTheTrees
  Anecdotal Evidence RoadRunner79 395 67435 December 14, 2016 at 2:53 pm
Last Post: downbeatplumb
  What philosophical evidence is there against believing in non-physical entities? joseph_ 150 15765 September 3, 2016 at 11:26 am
Last Post: downbeatplumb
  The nature of evidence Wryetui 150 19472 May 6, 2016 at 6:21 am
Last Post: ignoramus
  Witness Evidence RoadRunner79 248 43433 December 17, 2015 at 7:23 pm
Last Post: bennyboy
  Miracles are useless as evidence Pizza 0 1305 March 15, 2015 at 7:37 pm
Last Post: Pizza
  On the nature of evidence. trmof 125 32048 October 26, 2014 at 5:14 pm
Last Post: Fidel_Castronaut



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)