Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence

[IATIA]

Any evidence would indeed be a good start.

And still nothing but "He said she said ...".

[IATIA]

I think you're confusing an example with an anecdote.

What is the difference?

An example is an analogy, whereas an anecdote is opinion.

[TheRealJoeFish]

What is the difference?

An example is an analogy, whereas an anecdote is opinion.

Or, to put it another way, I believe an example is an instance that demonstrates an established rule, whereas an anecdote is an instance that purports to establish a rule (or at least nudges in that direction).

[RoadRunner79]

An example is an analogy, whereas an anecdote is opinion.

Or, to put it another way, I believe an example is an instance that demonstrates an established rule, whereas an anecdote is an instance that purports to establish a rule (or at least nudges in that direction).

So then, it would be a matter of prospective, and when used as the argument, an example would be an anecdote correct? I did look up the definitions, and some definitions do seem to blur the lines.

[Ravenshire]

This is where anything to do with religion falls down instantly because it makes no such things.

Oh, c'mon Rob. You know as well as I that religions make tons of predictions. It's not their fault that they're always wrong.

[vorlon13]

And then we have Joseph Smith.

Many, many EXTRAORDINARY claims, and even more amazing, he kept changing things !!

All the revelations, for example, perfectly received from God (he claimed) in the first go round, were nevertheless, altered, modified, changed and edited. Most, in fact, were changed multiple times.

Astonishingly, Joe was rarely called on the issue, and when he was, why, of course, who are we to presume God cannot change His mind ?? And the sheeple he was dealing with bought it, hook, line and sinker.

Witnesses to various items in the LDS lore and arcana, were subsequently excommunicated, and no one seemed to ask any questions about it. How can that be ??

What if Jesus 'excommunicated' Peter after the walking on water demonstration ? What if Thomas, after fingering Jesus nail holes was 'excommunicated' ??

Wouldn't we be pouncing on those defections/pillorations even to this day ?? How can someone with a front row seat to all the main events in LDS be kicked to the curb ??

[bennyboy]

What is the difference?

An example is an analogy, whereas an anecdote is opinion.

I don't think so.  An anecdote is a category of example-- one drawn from the teller's personal experience.  AND, most importantly, one which is not necessarily representative of the norm.

For example, everyone has an uncle who smoked like a chimney and lived to 90.  So a weak-minded person will use Uncle Jim as evidence that smoking isn't really that harmful, disregarding the entire scientific body.

The same goes for illness.  Aunt Ethel's kidney stones suddenly disappear, against doctors' expectations, and everyone starts weeping and praising Jeebus.  This is then used as anecdotal evidence in support of the reality of God.

As has already been said (Rob, maybe?), experiences and the conclusions people draw from them are very different.  That's why personal experiences, divorced from careful controls, aren't accepted as good evidence of extraordinary claims.

[robvalue]

I made some videos about scepticism which may help to get the point across.

http://youtu.be/cX7mdUh9yUE

http://youtu.be/lOrP9nb-yrk

A hypothetical example is never an anecdote, because an anecdote always implies that the described content actually happened.

So even if someone used a hypothetical example as their whole argument (and I haven't seen anyone doing this, by the way) it still wouldn't be an anecdote.

You telling someone else down the pub that some atheists used an example as their whole argument would be an anecdote. You're then saying that particular event did happen, just as you describe it.

The main difference between an anecdote and an example is that whether or not the example actually happened as described, or will happen as described, is not important. It's the point it is trying to convey that is important. With an anecdote, all that matters is whether it is true or not. An anecdote can be used as an example: at this point, the truth of the anecdote as a whole is no longer important.

Anecdotes: The floor gave way and I fell through, breaking both my legs. My friend Jimmy had already walked on the floor, but it didn't break for him. (The only important factor here is whether these events actually happened as described.)

Examples: A floor will generally have a maximum weight it can support. There is a wooden floor, and two people walk onto it. Max, who weighs less than this maximum walks onto the floor, and it supports him just fine. Jimmy, who weighs more than this maximum, walks onto the floor and it gives way. (Whether or not these examples actually happened is not important, it's the point they are illustrating that is important.)

Anecdote as an example: I walked on a floor and it gave way. I found out later that the maximum weight the floor could support was 50kg, and I weigh 60kg. (It's now not important whether this personal story actually happened or not in order to make the point.)

The fact that you haven't given a single example to us to help illustrate your point is what makes this discussion so difficult. When someone is trying to make an argument and can't or won't produce any examples, I have to doubt if they really know what point they are making themselves; or wonder if they are dishonestly trying to slip a point in that they can't back up. I don't like to think this of people, which is why I always ask for examples.

I think we've done this topic to death by now, as I pointed out the titular phrase is not a scientific principle, it's an informal rule of thumb. If you personally will accept a series of anecdotes as sufficient evidence for a highly unusual claim, then I'm afraid that just makes you gullible. The thing is, I don't actually think you would do this, regarding most topics. Since you won't give any examples, it looks like a precursor to an agenda, to which you're willing to stretch the truth about how you'd really handle situations unrelated to the agenda.

But even if you would employ low evidence standards in everyday life, that's no reason for science to follow suit since you've not demonstrated it's actually a good idea.

[Cyberman]

You just reminded me of the time I was in a rock group called Fat Bastards. We went through a stage.

[FreeTony]

I am deeply suspicious of anyone who wants to lower the standards of evidence required, so that their claim may be believed.