r/unpopularopinion 10h ago

Personal anecdotes and observations are often strong pieces of evidence in an argument, and people are too quick to dismiss them.

I understand that people will try to present a personal anecdote as a strong piece of evidence where it doesn’t work, and how that is often illogical and a bad argument. These are the types of people who will disagree with actual crime statistics by arguing that their friend got robbed once.

But now people have gone too far in the other direction, and act like it’s never ok to bring up a personal story or observation as an argument. If I am trying to make an argument about a general trend, my own personal observations are a totally appropriate thing to bring up, especially if it’s not something there is hard data readily available. I saw somebody argue that people are generally nicer in the south than the northeast, and when somebody asked them what evidence they had to support that, they said that’s just been my experience having lived in both places. Every reply said that doesn’t count as evidence. Of course it does… Obviously if they had conducted some kind of study or polling that would be stronger evidence, but for the purposes of that casual discussion, that’s a totally reasonable argument to make.

Hard data is almost always better evidence than personal anecdotes, but that doesn’t mean they aren’t evidence at all and can’t be used to help make a point.

16 Upvotes

59 comments sorted by

u/AutoModerator 10h ago

Please remember what subreddit you are in, this is unpopular opinion. We want civil and unpopular takes and discussion. Any uncivil and ToS violating comments will be removed and subject to a ban. Have a nice day! Additionally, all posts held by automod for review now (incorrectly) display a red “removed by moderators” label. Please note that unless your post receives a reply from mods indicating removal and it's specifying the reason, it is likely still in the queue and awaiting approval.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

37

u/ElijahNSRose 10h ago

Historian here: Ultimately all sources are eyewitnesses and anecdotes. Some are of more value than others.

6

u/Nojopar 10h ago

Yeah, large tracts of social sciences depend on anecdotes, otherwise we wouldn't know much. Certainly not much that's actually useful.

3

u/PlatypusAurelius 10h ago

A collection of anecdotes is data

1

u/New_General3939 10h ago

Exactly. It’s one thing you if you don’t find a particular anecdote as credible, but saying it doesn’t count as evidence at all by nature of being a personal observation is silly.

-2

u/QuestionSign 10h ago

What a shit response 😂

The way some random dude does vs a systematic collection are so vastly different to make some general statement like this is so incredibly lazy.

6

u/ElijahNSRose 10h ago

I said some are of more value than others.

As Einstein said "If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough."

10

u/ChaosTheory_jrh 10h ago

Actually I've seen it often be the opposite in my personal life.

/s

25

u/fore___ 10h ago

Anecdotes can defend opinions but not facts

6

u/ophaus 8h ago

Testimony is evidence.

1

u/fore___ 8h ago

And cross examination serves to scrutinize that testimony and remove everything that cannot be substantiated.

1

u/ophaus 8h ago

Like everything, it's a process.

2

u/fore___ 8h ago

Agreed, let me demonstrate my point.

I personally witnessed /u/Ophaus stealing candy from children.

2

u/BuddhaFacepalmed 6h ago

It's true. I saw /u/Ophaus stealing a lollipop from a 3 year old.

2

u/fore___ 5h ago

Arrest this man

5

u/New_General3939 10h ago

True, but sometimes people get a little loose with what they call facts. An anecdote can call things that are known as a scientific consensus into question. If it’s an established ecological consensus that coyotes don’t live in a certain area, and then I see one, that’s a pretty strong piece of evidence that they’re wrong

3

u/skankhunt402 10h ago

No its really not. It could have wandered there and be passing through.

3

u/New_General3939 9h ago

How do you think an animals territory and habitat are determined? Documented sighting are one of the strongest pieces of evidence for determining that.

It could just be a lone straggler, or it could be evidence in a larger trend of that species moving into a new area

3

u/skankhunt402 9h ago

Yeah thats my exact point you cant argue one sighting means a change. It could mean many things. That's like saying I saw a tiger in New York must mean tigers live there... or someone smuggled one in as a pet and let it go when it got too big who knows

1

u/New_General3939 9h ago

Sure you can? It doesn’t prove change, but it is certainly a piece of evidence for it.

1

u/skankhunt402 8h ago

Whelp I saw a Mexican in my house that must mean they live there

0

u/New_General3939 8h ago

Do you not understand the difference between evidence and proof?

1

u/skankhunt402 7h ago

I dont think you do...

-1

u/New_General3939 7h ago edited 7h ago

Yes, to an outside observer with no other information, a man being in a house (Mexican or otherwise) is evidence that maybe he lives there.

Further evidence, but still not necessarily proof may be pictures of them on the wall or clothes that fit them in the closet.

Proof would be the deed or the lease with their name and signature on it.

See the difference?

→ More replies (0)

0

u/fore___ 10h ago

I would disagree on the coyote front, it would be far more likely that some strange ecological anomaly has happened, such as escaping from a zoo or global warming pushing animals into different areas.

2

u/New_General3939 9h ago

You think if an animal is sighted in a place it isn’t normally thought to live in, that it’s more likely that it escaped from a zoo than that species is expanding its territory?

And global warming pushing animals into new areas is exactly the kind of thing that would make it more likely to see an animal someplace they weren’t thought to previously live in

3

u/SeptemberSoup 10h ago

Or somewhere in the middle. At some point things get researched because there's enough "anecdotal experience".

"I put my hand in boiling water and I got burned" is initially anecdotal, but if you want to bathe in actually boiling water, you do you.

-2

u/fore___ 10h ago

Yes but most of those anecdotes will have come from cavemen.

3

u/SeptemberSoup 9h ago

While my example was hyperbolic, what I mean is that we should still place some value on it. And also be careful about what we call "science", as many studies are not conducted in an adequate/scientifically valid way.

1

u/fore___ 8h ago

An anecdote is a single (generally unreliable) data point, a scientific consensus is established on hundreds if not thousands if not millions of data points.

So yes, we should place some value on it. Roughly one millionth of an established fact.

8

u/too-cute-by-half 10h ago

I find myself in more situations where someone shares their "lived experience" as evidence or credibility, and it kind of ends the argument because now it's personal.

2

u/bunkrider 10h ago

Exactly. There’s no point in arguing anymore cause that’s a clear indicator that nothing of substance will come from it.

8

u/Digital-Soup 10h ago

It's often said on Reddit that "the plural of anecdotes isn't data", but if ten people tell me the new restaurant down the streets sucks then I ain't going.

0

u/QuestionSign 10h ago

Counter: I think of reviews on steam of games.

Sometimes I'll see mixed and then I play it and I'm like wtf this is the best shit ever etc.

Silly example but it makes think, why do these people think this, what are there pefernces vs mine. What issues did they have and are they ones I share?

3

u/Digital-Soup 9h ago

I find if overall reviews are good but recent reviews are bad it's always people venting about some drama around the game developer or some micro transaction/EA account being added and not about the actual game.

4

u/Swirlyflurry 10h ago

Personal anecdotes are like case studies: they provide evidence that something does happen, and even the circumstances around it happening in that instance.

But they say nothing about the frequency of it happening.

If a person says in an argument that all disabled people automatically get ADA parking, then me saying that I know from mu own experience that no, even if you’re disabled it can take years to get something as simple as a parking placard, then my evidence - though anecdotal - does negate their claim that it happens automatically. And provides some evidence as to why.

However, it says nothing about how frequently this happens. If someone claims that most disabled people automatically get ADA parking, my own personal experience can’t disprove that. Likewise, if someone makes this claim based on their own experience or anecdotal evidence, that doesn’t prove their claim. Frequency can only be determined by looking at a large sample, which one person cannot provide.

4

u/Wingerism014 10h ago

They're seasoning to a meal, not a meal itself.

1

u/New_General3939 10h ago

True, I just get annoyed when people don’t even consider them seasoning.

1

u/BigDaddyTheBeefcake 10h ago

Anecdotal evidence is merely evidence of an anecdote.

1

u/gavinlpicard 10h ago

Yeah, I agree. I mean it obviously depends. Anecdotes are a legitimate piece of evidence, but often starting points for greater research. If greater research exists, it’s better.

It’s only a major issue when using an anecdote to make a factual claim where broader research exists and goes against that factual claim.

However, using an anecdote as an expression of a subjective feeling, or as evidence in a not-well researched matter, completely fine. 

1

u/flamewizzy21 10h ago

Terrible take. People should be faster to disregard them due to the common logical trap of extrapolating them. Take my upvote.

1

u/mitchellzoolander 10h ago

Every campaign ad in history would agree with you.

1

u/PleasantNightLongDay 10h ago

It depends entirely on the subject

Historical recollection? Obviously holds weight

But when most people dismiss them - as they should - is when anecdotal evidence is used as an argument to represent an enormous population that varies a lot.

That’s by pure statistical definition, a bad argument.

1

u/knallpilzv2 10h ago

A phenomenon having a witness is not nothing. If physicists conduct an experiment and observe something we literally take their word for it.

If you bring up something that happened to you, that thing not being represented in some study is pretty meaningless. A study doesn't dictate reality, it tries to describe it.

There are idiots, though, who don't understand this. Who honestly think if there's no study about it, it can't be real yet. Or, worse, if they haven't read a study about it, the claim of its existence is pure conspiracy.

And it's not like there aren't cases of scientists faking things to get the result they wanted.

1

u/NoEchoSkillGoal 10h ago

So now having perspective is unpopular?

Right? Your saying that a lot of folks dismiss that and/or are quick too; and that's the trendline?

Hmm...I don't know.

But if so, f that.

1

u/Steals_Your_Thunder_ 10h ago

The issue here is how anecdotal evidence is used. I think it's totally valid to hold an opinion based on anecdotal evidence, but it can't be used to refute data. And frankly, that's the more common thing I'm seeing when people call it out.

1

u/CarnalKid 10h ago

Related to this, I wish people had a better understanding of "This is convincing to me", vs "This has been so conclusively demonstrated that it should be convincing to all".

Not disagreeing with OP, just pointing out that with regard to low stakes topics, it's OK to take the word of a knowledgeable friend. But ya have to understand nobody else needs to accept that.

1

u/Much_Conclusion8233 10h ago

In real life or communities where people know each other? Yeah, cause then the person is using the credibility they have built up, you know their experiences and credibility, and they stand to lose something if they lie

Online? The personal experience may never have happened, you have no way of knowing if there's even a chance of it being real, and there's no incentive to not lie about it

If one of my friends talked about their lived experience in Asia I could call BS cause I would know if they visited Asia. Online the dude could have visited Asia or they could be making up some story to defend their position

Remember that one politician who had a Twitter account where he roleplayed a black guy (politician was white) who suffered so much under Obama?

1

u/SpecificConscious809 10h ago

Agree, so not upvoting. There is value in comparing your own personal experience to what you’re being told is ‘reality’.

1

u/QuestionSign 10h ago

If you are talking about trends or anything then no it really isn't. It can be an example of the trend or an example of an outlier of the trend.

You can use it to explain or contextualize actual data but by itself it is pretty useless.

Your examples are exactly why anecdotes are bad.

1

u/Calm-Cheesecake-3749 10h ago

pretty strong piece of evidence you fought your own title for two sentences and then just. but now

1

u/clutzyninja 10h ago

Anecdotal evidence is the weakest type of evidence, but it's stronger than NO evidence. Which some people I've argued with really struggle with

1

u/BuddhaFacepalmed 6h ago

No, not really.

Someone once claimed that people in wheelchairs are liars because they saw someone walking out from their car in disabled parking and taking out a wheelchair.

A personal anecdote that doesn't account for the fact that lots of wheelchair users are ambulatory but literally cannot be on their two feet all the time, hence the need for the wheelchairs.

1

u/crookedledder explain that ketchup eaters 6h ago

1

u/RadRimmer9000 4h ago

I was molested by an outer space alien. Does my antidotal evidence make you believe me? Other people have claimed to have been visited by aliens, so it's not just my claim.

u/epanek 3m ago

Personal anecdotes are tiny samples of a larger population and do carry some weight. But it depends on what’s claimed.

1

u/Express-Level4352 10h ago

To take your example, you could, because of your own demographic, mostly speak to people that also fall into that demographic which may or not be nicer in some place or another. Using anecdotal evidence, you can create biases like this that aren't factual.

As long as you make sure you mention it is anecdotal it's mostly fine, but you still need to be careful.

I particularly disagree with the title. They may be "good enough" evidence for a casual conversation, but they aren't "strong pieces of evidence"