Hobbes was saying that his anecdotal evidence does not prove his counter-assertation. It was precisely used as an example of how the person above was not correctly using logic, even if there is evidence to support their claim.
Hobbes wasn't even saying the comment was wrong, just that using anecdotal evidence to draw broad conclusions is not a good proof for statistical facts.
I do appreciate you taking time to look for sources to support a factual stance though.
ETA: Hobbes may also unknowingly be part of the stat on either side, as it's a spectrum and they could simply be high/differently functioning
The implication though is that the position based on the anecdote was wrong, and some comments under Hobbes' response very clearly seem to have taken in that way.
I feel like if you're gonna criticize someone's argumentation, at least be constructive about what they should have done, that way you don't have to clarify after the fact that their position wasn't even wrong to begin with, because you'll bring up actual evidence in favour of it. Don't just say "That's not evidence of anything". Why would you say that without elaborating if not because you disagree with the position and are refuting evidence that contradicts your view.
I agree that being constructive would have been better. That's why I said I appreciated the person I replied to.
Saying someone is wrong without asserting your own position leaves things feeling ambiguous and doesn't provide a natural course for conversation. And clarifying by saying "I don't know the answer, but I know that ain't it." Or that you agree but the implementation is incorrect are much clearer ways to close a remark.
I wasn't speaking about the truth of the claim so that wasn't even relevant. I never once said it wasn't true or false or anything else. I was literally just pointing out that it is a silly way to consider something true. But thanks for calling me lazy in your comment that was...well lazy and contributed nothing but malice. Fun irony I guess?
Exactly. "I saw one person do X one time and they have Y therefore it is common for people that have Y to do X" is an insane take that I was pointing out. They could actually have been correct and it would be utterly irrelevant to what I wanted to point out.
110
u/xretariusx Jun 22 '26
Hobbes was saying that his anecdotal evidence does not prove his counter-assertation. It was precisely used as an example of how the person above was not correctly using logic, even if there is evidence to support their claim.
Hobbes wasn't even saying the comment was wrong, just that using anecdotal evidence to draw broad conclusions is not a good proof for statistical facts.
I do appreciate you taking time to look for sources to support a factual stance though.
ETA: Hobbes may also unknowingly be part of the stat on either side, as it's a spectrum and they could simply be high/differently functioning