= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
shokwave comments on Help Fund Lukeprog at SIAI - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (276)
Can we be forgiving and assume that multiple anecdotes fail because they have a consistent bias related to how they are obtained?
Sure, and I regularly do ("Well, if situation X seems like it would produce anecdote Y, then all anecdote Y shows us is that situation X happened, not that contention Z is necessarily true - only if situation X shows us that contention Z is true").
I would surmise that not all commentors are willing to be that forgiving.