It is widely believed that eating chocolate can cause acne. Indeed, many people who are susceptible to acne report t...
Angel92May 12, 2022
What is considered evidence?
"It is widely believed that eating chocolate can cause acne. Indeed, many people who are susceptible to acne report that, in their own experience, eating large amounts of chocolate is invariably followed by an outbreak of that skin condition."
What type of evidence is this called?
B is saying that the author provides additional evidence. In order for something to be additional there has to be something previous to it which in this case is evidence. I did not know that wide recognized beliefs can be considered as evidence. I know that the bible can be considered evidence a book based on religious beliefs, books based on meditation/nirvana and so forth. But if there is word of mouth and if the common belief of eating chocolate causing acne is not word of mouth considered as evidence please explain, I would love to know why. I thought as long as something is physical/tangible that is evidence.
Replies
Create a free account to read and
take part in forum discussions.
We could probably call this anecdotal evidence, although that mostly depends on what "many" means here. Depending on the sample size and how the question was asked, perhaps this is survey data, but the collective experiences of a group of people would probably best be called anecdotal evidence. While this is not the most ironclad evidence (and it is really quite weak), it is still a form of evidence. If ten people saw a red car flee from the scene of an accident, it may not prove beyond belief that the event happened, but it provides strong reason to think that it did. Likewise, if "many" people report a phenomenon, and speculate as to its cause there is evidence that the phenomenon happens (e.g. if I report having a stomach ache, there is evidence I have a stomach ache), although there may not be enough evidence to say anything about causality.
Angel92May 17, 2022
Thanks Emil for your explanation on this one as I was wondering how this can be considered evidence and I can see where this going with your explanation. I don't want to go in a philosophical train but just want to understand another thing when it comes to facts vs evidence. Can they both be treated the same or do they differ. For example does facts support evidence or does evidence support facts? because I guess I'm seeing this as a widespread belief that eating chocolates causes acne is anecdotal evidence supports the fact that it can be confirmed widespread belief eating chocolate causes acne?
Emil-KunkinMay 18, 2022
Hi Angel92,
Broadly speaking I would say that evidence is a form of a fact. Specifically, it is a fact that someone is using to prove a point or suggest that something is true- in other words, evidence is a fact cited in support of a conclusion. That is to say that evidence is usually offered as a premise in an argument. In this case, it is a fact that many people think that chocolate causes acne. It is not a fact that chocolate does indeed cause it, but the beliefs of people is a fact, and that fact can be used as anecdotal evidence. Note, however, that anecdotal evidence is pretty weak- and an argument that rests solely on anecdotal evidence is probably flawed for that reason.
