I feel like often people ask me “Oh yea? Name some examples.” and the burden is on me to prove something by providing representative examples. But often it’s so overwhelming how many examples there are for something that I feel obligated then to either list everything, or try extra hard to find good examples, and even then I feel like I could be misrepresenting the case by not providing enough examples. Basically I feel like I would have to give many, many examples, or none at all, otherwise anything in the middle could be non-representative of the true trend.

Ironically, now you will want me to give examples of situations that I’m talking about. But for this I will provide 2 examples and rest on good faith that you will believe me (given the context of this post) that this happens much more often than I care to provide examples for.

So one example is when you are attempting to prove to someone that a certain thing is scientifically proven or is agreed upon as scientific consensus. You can look to the generally agreed hierarchy of evidence and provide what it considers to be high-quality evidence, such as meta analyses and systematic reviews, but even then there can be disagreement between specific reports, and there can be outliers that disagree with the overall most common trends or findings. So the only way to really prove something is to provide many, many different instances of scientific evidence to the point where the other person would be unable to find the same level or amount of evidence to the contrary by virtue of the fact that it doesn’t exist to the same overwhelming degree, essentially proving the scientific fact. But again, this takes either an enormous amount of high quality evidence from various different sources, or nothing at all and simply an assertion that something is in fact scientifically proven or agreed upon as scientific consensus, because anything else in the middle could misrepresent the case and make it seem less substantiated than it actually is. It’s either “all or nothing”.

And now I’ll provide a specific anecdote about someone who argued that there are no decent stories with a female main protagonist. I am so sure and believe it to be so obvious that there is an extensive history of great female main protagonists and female-driven stories, in all forms of storytelling, that I found this an overwhelming task to attempt to prove when the person asked for specific examples. How can I make the case of the wealth of good stories with female main characters without providing an exhaustive (or highly numerous) list? Even if I pick a few great examples, the person can always make the objection that “Those are an exception, and they don’t represent the overall trend.” and I risk misrepresenting that trend if the examples chosen aren’t the best ones available, too. How can you possibly prove something like that without a very long and well-thought out and extensively researched list? Again, it seems like it’s either attempt such a daunting task, or don’t engage with the request for examples at all and just assert the claim that there are many examples, without specifying any to avoid the risk of taking on the burden of proving it and possibly misrepresenting the trend.

I hope this made any sense at all.

  • Flax
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    3 months ago

    What sort of evidence would convince you?

    • Maalus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Complete and irrefutable evidence that doesn’t require “faith” to prove it. No “look at the beauty of this world!” type of bullshit, actual miracles being performed, actual omniscient powers, abilty to create, etc.

      • Flax
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        3 months ago

        These are documented in the New Testament.

          • Flax
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            Can you show me proof that St Patrick existed?

            • Maalus@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              Stop changing the subject. I told you exactly what I expect to “convince me”. There isn’t any proof.

              • Flax
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                3 months ago

                There isn’t any proof for St Patrick?

                • Maalus@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  We aren’t talking about him, I don’t give two shits about him. Provide irrefutable proof that god exists or go away.

                  • Flax
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    2
                    ·
                    3 months ago

                    I did. If you discount the New Testament as a “magical book” then you literally have to throw away several other historical figures who we have no evidence of other than in writing

    • maryjayjay@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 months ago

      If I told you that dogs exist and you didn’t believe me, what kind of evidence would you want to see?

      • Flax
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        3 months ago

        But that’s a created thing, not a higher being.