No Evidence Vs Evidence
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
06-05-2015, 09:58 AM
RE: No Evidence Vs Evidence
I think the point might be that different people looking at the same clues can come to different conclusions.
If there can be only one correct conclusion, some of the clues lead nowhere, or to the wrong conclusion, therefore they are not evidence. The correct conclusion will have the correct clues in the correct order, thus making them evidence.
But I could be way off. Big Grin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-05-2015, 09:59 AM
RE: No Evidence Vs Evidence
(06-05-2015 09:20 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  Let's say we come across a dead body, perhaps a scene of a crime, we see a variety of things like ruffled clothes, some bruises, etc...And a variety of people draw a seemingly infinite number of conclusion based on these things, a nearly infinite series of explanations.

Since all these explanations incorporate these observations, could we accuse any of these explanation of having "no evidence" at all? Or is it only the true and accurate conclusion that has evidence, while the other ones don't?

That is why you have professionals who collect data. People generally just jump to conclusions, no one has time to accumulate years and years of evidence and experience, only pros do that.

There is all kinds of evidence that no one knows what to do with - that's how science starts - someone sees a phenomenon and decides to start researching it.

[Image: dobie.png]Science is the process we've designed to be responsible for generating our best guess as to what the fuck is going on. Girly Man
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-05-2015, 10:04 AM
RE: No Evidence Vs Evidence
(06-05-2015 09:25 AM)Full Circle Wrote:  Did you get a chance to read the thread with Free discussing "abscence of evidence" vs "evidence of abscence"?

One is not like the other if you plan on equating a murdered body to an absent god.

If not carry on.

My interest is only in regards to what makes something evidence, is it merely a matter of utility or not.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-05-2015, 10:06 AM
RE: No Evidence Vs Evidence
(06-05-2015 09:58 AM)pablo Wrote:  If there can be only one correct conclusion, some of the clues lead nowhere, or to the wrong conclusion, therefore they are not evidence. The correct conclusion will have the correct clues in the correct order, thus making them evidence.
But I could be way off. Big Grin

So it's the correct conclusion, that elevates the clues to the status of evidence? Prior to the correct conclusion being determined, they're just clues and not evidence?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-05-2015, 10:08 AM
RE: No Evidence Vs Evidence
(06-05-2015 10:06 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(06-05-2015 09:58 AM)pablo Wrote:  If there can be only one correct conclusion, some of the clues lead nowhere, or to the wrong conclusion, therefore they are not evidence. The correct conclusion will have the correct clues in the correct order, thus making them evidence.
But I could be way off. Big Grin

So it's the correct conclusion, that elevates the clues to the status of evidence? Prior to the correct conclusion being determined, they're just clues and not evidence?

Of course they're evidence - everything you can see is evidence of something.

[Image: dobie.png]Science is the process we've designed to be responsible for generating our best guess as to what the fuck is going on. Girly Man
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-05-2015, 10:11 AM
RE: No Evidence Vs Evidence
(06-05-2015 10:06 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(06-05-2015 09:58 AM)pablo Wrote:  If there can be only one correct conclusion, some of the clues lead nowhere, or to the wrong conclusion, therefore they are not evidence. The correct conclusion will have the correct clues in the correct order, thus making them evidence.
But I could be way off. Big Grin

So it's the correct conclusion, that elevates the clues to the status of evidence? Prior to the correct conclusion being determined, they're just clues and not evidence?

They are evidence if they come a correct conclusion, or at least the most plausible of the group of conclusions.
My earlier post was trying to understand the OP.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-05-2015, 10:13 AM
RE: No Evidence Vs Evidence
(06-05-2015 10:11 AM)pablo Wrote:  They are evidence if they come a correct conclusion, or at least the most plausible of the group of conclusions.
My earlier post was trying to understand the OP.

But you're saying it's only after they come to a correct conclusion, the most plausible of the group of conclusions, that the "clues" as you put it, become evidence?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-05-2015, 10:15 AM
RE: No Evidence Vs Evidence
(06-05-2015 10:08 AM)Dom Wrote:  Of course they're evidence - everything you can see is evidence of something.

So in your view, the "clues" as pablo put it, are evidence from the beginning, regardless if the correct conclusion has been drawn from them?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-05-2015, 10:17 AM
RE: No Evidence Vs Evidence
I'm not sure if we're talking about scientific evidence, legal evidence, or what, but I'd say any observable condition that informs your conclusion, regardless of the conclusion's correctness could be considered evidence. Of course there's also the question of whether evidence is solid, credible, relevant, causal or merely correlative, etc.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Mr. Boston's post
06-05-2015, 10:18 AM
RE: No Evidence Vs Evidence
(06-05-2015 10:13 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(06-05-2015 10:11 AM)pablo Wrote:  They are evidence if they come a correct conclusion, or at least the most plausible of the group of conclusions.
My earlier post was trying to understand the OP.

But you're saying it's only after they come to a correct conclusion, the most plausible of the group of conclusions, that the "clues" as you put it, become evidence?

Try thinking of your scenario as a crime scene, and putting together a case for trial.
If you're trying to lead me into absolute truths, I'm not biting.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes pablo's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: