False dichotomies and other fallacies RPGers use

[ggroy]

Yes, but that still doesn't turn anecdote into evidence.

Is it reasonable for someone to accept the anecdote is plausible? That's the point under discussion.

(An example to clarify things).

One runs a computer to test out whether Fermat's Last Theorem is true.

"No three positive integers a, b, and c can satisfy the equation a^n + b^n = c^n for any integer value of n greater than two".

Fermat's Last Theorem - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

One runs a computer program and notices this is true up to very large integers n (greater than two), and positive integers a, b, and c up to very large numbers which the computer can handle.

Would this be anecdote or evidence, in support of Fermat's Last Theorem?

 

[Jeff Wilder]

It looks like you are arguing that:

1) If someone says "in my experience, foo" you should not necessarily take foo as plausible.

2) However, if it is in your experience, it is reasonable to believe that foo is the case, and is thus plausible.

Correct me if I am incorrect in the above, as to me, they don't seem to mesh very well.

If you are correct in (1), then who says it is not relevant.

Of course it's relevant. That's (part of) what the "necessarily" part means.

If *I* say "in my experience, foo", then *I* should not necessarily take foo as plausible, either.

If I were you, I might feel the same way. (Couldn't resist. Sorry.)

I've been trying to argue that if someone says "my experience is foo", then it is probably plausible that their experience is foo.

Why in the world does it matter if it's plausible that their experience is foo? And how in the world do you make that judgment without making some kind of judgment on foo itself?

Look, people in the card rooms tell me (constantly) things like, "I once hit three royal flushes in five hands." They are claiming that experience.

I disbelieve them. They could be accurately describing their experience, but I disbelieve them because I know how remote the possibility is of what they describe. In order to judge the "plausibility" of what they say is their experience, I can judge the plausibility of the experience itself. There are other ways to judge the plausibility of their "claim of experience," and if i have those available, I'll use them, too.

What I'm never -- ever -- going to do is accept the claim of an experience as "plausible" solely because someone states that claim. And anybody who does ... well, good luck to 'em.

 

[ggroy]

Look, people in the card rooms tell me (constantly) things like, "I once hit three royal flushes in five hands." They are claiming that experience.

I disbelieve them. They could be accurately describing their experience, but I disbelieve them because I know how remote the possibility is of what they describe.

I have several friends who are hardcore poker players, whom constantly talk about experiences like that. Every time I ask them about whether it is luck, they usually discount that it may be due to just luck, while completely believing it is some innate skill or "magic touch" they have. Usually I don't say much about it afterward, and drop the discussion. Explaining the mathematical probabilities behind poker, just goes in one ear and out the other with these particular friends.

 

[Raven Crowking]

One runs a computer program and notices this is true up to very large integers n (greater than two), and positive integers a, b, and c up to very large numbers which the computer can handle.

Would this be anecdote or evidence, in support of Fermat's Last Theorem?

Who is the "one"?

I run a computer program and notice that this is true is evidence (to me) and anecdote (to you). After all, you have only my statement that it is so, and, like your poker-playing buddies with the "magic touch", my statement is subject to question.

This is, AFAICT and in accordance with my education, an important part of the scientific method. You do not have to trust my word; you can repeat the experiment yourself. You can build up your own experiences through conducting the experiment yourself. If your experiences contradict mine, you should not take mine as evidence.

At some point, of course, the number of experiments you'd have to do to gain evidence becomes too great, and requires too great an expense. That is why the scientific community uses peer review and independent confirmation of experiments. The value of these is no less, and no more, than the value one places on the truthfulness, diligence, and intelligence/understanding of those involved.

Testimony is only evidence (to you) if it passes your personal barrier of skepticism.

The less a claim conforms to your expectations (based on your experience and your interpretation of experience), the greater the barrier of skepticism. For most people, anyway.



RC

 

[ggroy]

Who is the "one"?

Me.

I have written such a program in the past before.

 

[Raven Crowking]

What I'm never -- ever -- going to do is accept the claim of an experience as "plausible" solely because someone states that claim. And anybody who does ... well, good luck to 'em.

Please define the word "gullible".

 

[Doug McCrae]

Look, people in the card rooms tell me (constantly) things like, "I once hit three royal flushes in five hands." They are claiming that experience.

I disbelieve them. They could be accurately describing their experience, but I disbelieve them because I know how remote the possibility is of what they describe.

Probability is objective. It obeys mathematical laws. By contrast what works in a rpg is incredibly subjective. Rpgs are art. In a highly subjective field, individual experience is king.

A: I really enjoyed that movie.
B: No you didn't.

 

[Jeff Wilder]

A: I really enjoyed that movie.
B: No you didn't.

So ... what you're getting from this is that someone is claiming they would dispute someone else's statement of preference? Really?

If Umbran wants to amend his argument to "If someone claims to have a preference for foo, I'll accept his claim as plausible," he's free to do so. It's certainly a much more reasonable thing to say.

 

[Fifth Element]

Look, people in the card rooms tell me (constantly) things like, "I once hit three royal flushes in five hands." They are claiming that experience.

I disbelieve them.

As would I, because an experience like that has a determinable mathematical probability, in this case one that is exceedingly small. In many cases with RPGs, you're dealing only with preferences, where you can't determine such probabilities. In such cases you just have to apply your reason. "Does it seem plausible that some people like playing elves, even though I've never met one?" That's where the reasonable observer test comes in.

What I'm never -- ever -- going to do is accept the claim of an experience as "plausible" solely because someone states that claim. And anybody who does ... well, good luck to 'em.

No one's asking you to.

 

[Fifth Element]

So ... what you're getting from this is that someone is claiming they would dispute someone else's statement of preference? Really?

I can provide an example of that from another thread, if you like.