• Abracadaniel [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    epistemology is a big topic and we’re clearly operating on some contradictory premises/priors but I’ll continue to engage in good faith.

    I think I’d consider the following as evidence of an event: photos/video, eyewitness testimony, and measurement data; each provided with provenance/traceability through the entire chain of reporting. Each reporting agent’s credibility on the topic plays a role in weighing the evidence.

    Finally the believability (another big term) of the claim itself plays a important role in how much evidence is necessary for me to believe it. Here’s where I put on my internet atheist hat and reference the “Sagan Standard”: Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof and it’s corollary: a claim asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

    • Call me Lenny/Leni@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      The reason I asked is an outbreak is usually “in the shadows” until the community of medical professionals confirm it. And it’s not this I intend to reference though, but the fact many would be quick to jump at one country falling under the definition but not another (as well as individual states, as different states handled it differently). However we define evidence (even witnesses are hard, many people will say people dying in front of you wouldn’t be proof unless indicated by professionals), we’d have to apply it universally; the time period between the first suspected patient zero to the first confirmed case to the last confirmed case should be treated by the same rules in both countries, and in all countries. Depending on the standard, either you have both countries faring well or both countries not faring well.

      Given North Korea is more private, that makes the latter the heavier choice, at least if you ask me.