RootsBooster Posted August 20, 2015 Share Posted August 20, 2015 sigh...doesnt matter. Well, you highlighted this... Fine. However the likely consensus is that it must be true. Of course it may not be. and followed it up with this... proving the point thus. A singular anecdote is valid but not as valid as multiple of the same or similar anecdotes. And multiple anecdotes are more likely to be true, the consensus is more likely that they are true. ...so unless you missed something out it appears you think that simply claiming "the likely consensus is that it must be true" proves that the likely consensus is that it must be true Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TJC1 Posted August 20, 2015 Share Posted August 20, 2015 This rings a bell lead a horse to water...but a pencil must be lead ---------- Post added 20-08-2015 at 16:04 ---------- Well, you highlighted this... and followed it up with this... ...so unless you missed something out it appears you think that simply claiming "the likely consensus is that it must be true" proves that the likely consensus is that it must be true im not explaining it more for the hard of understanding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnailyBoy Posted August 20, 2015 Share Posted August 20, 2015 lead a horse to water...but a pencil must be lead ---------- Post added 20-08-2015 at 16:04 ---------- im not explaining it more for the hard of understanding. Please try, I'm looking forward to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adrea Posted August 20, 2015 Share Posted August 20, 2015 lead a horse to water...but a pencil must be lead ---------- Post added 20-08-2015 at 16:04 ---------- im not explaining it more for the hard of understanding. It makes sense to me. One person makes a comment about someone they know that had a child in order to secure a council house and benefits. Take it with a pinch of salt unless you also know someone that had a child in order to secure a council house and benefits. A thousand people from different parts of the country saying the same thing and its more likley to be based on the reality that some people do indeed have child in order to secure a council house and benefits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFKvsNixon Posted August 20, 2015 Share Posted August 20, 2015 It makes sense to me. One person makes a comment about someone they know that had a child in order to secure a council house and benefits. Take it with a pinch of salt unless you also know someone that had a child in order to secure a council house and benefits. A thousand people from different parts of the country saying the same thing and its more likley to be based on the reality that some people do indeed have child in order to secure a council house and benefits. Or they may have all read the same Facebook post! It's much better to rely upon sound evidence as opposed to gossip to try to find out what is really happening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cassity Posted August 20, 2015 Share Posted August 20, 2015 (edited) It makes sense to me. One person makes a comment about someone they know that had a child in order to secure a council house and benefits. Take it with a pinch of salt unless you also know someone that had a child in order to secure a council house and benefits. A thousand people from different parts of the country saying the same thing and its more likley to be based on the reality that some people do indeed have child in order to secure a council house and benefits. You mean like one person 'sees' a ghost only to be followed by a plethora of key tappers also seeing (must be true) ghosts? Yeah, lots of rationality there. Edited August 20, 2015 by cassity Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted August 20, 2015 Share Posted August 20, 2015 It makes sense to me. One person makes a comment about someone they know that had a child in order to secure a council house and benefits. Take it with a pinch of salt unless you also know someone that had a child in order to secure a council house and benefits. A thousand people from different parts of the country saying the same thing and its more likley to be based on the reality that some people do indeed have child in order to secure a council house and benefits. That someone on the bus, or in the pub, or at work or on Facebook said that they know. For reality, read 'suspicion based upon rumour'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adrea Posted August 20, 2015 Share Posted August 20, 2015 Or they may have all read the same Facebook post! It's much better to rely upon sound evidence as opposed to gossip to try to find out what is really happening. Its more likley that they do actually know someone that had a child in order to secure a council house and benefits. What is this sound evidence you take about? How else would you know that someone had a child in order to secure a council house and benefits, if it wasn't for someone knowing them and telling the world about them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted August 20, 2015 Share Posted August 20, 2015 It makes sense to me. One person makes a comment about someone they know that had a child in order to secure a council house and benefits. Take it with a pinch of salt unless you also know someone that had a child in order to secure a council house and benefits. A thousand people from different parts of the country saying the same thing and its more likley to be based on the reality that some people do indeed have child in order to secure a council house and benefits. Group think doesn't make it more likely that it's correct, it just makes it more likely that they read the same trash talking 'news' paper and don't apply any critical thought to what they read. ---------- Post added 20-08-2015 at 20:20 ---------- How else would you know that someone had a child in order to secure a council house and benefits, if it wasn't for someone knowing them and telling the world about them. How would someone know at all, and isn't it more likely that they just assumed or guessed such a thing? That's how rumours start. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFKvsNixon Posted August 20, 2015 Share Posted August 20, 2015 Its more likley that they do actually know someone that had a child in order to secure a council house and benefits. What is this sound evidence you take about? How else would you know that someone had a child in order to secure a council house and benefits, if it wasn't for someone knowing them and telling the world about them. I disagree. I think that it's more likely that the people making the comments are just using common stereotypes to pass on lazy gossip, maybe with a bit of conformation bias thrown in for good measure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now