The favouring of source material over statistics to understand life

People like to quote statistics to prove a point in an argument, but I'd prefer to go to the source material.  That is, first-hand, eyewitness accounts. These interest me far more than numbers applied to man-made designations, which often have no validity in truth.

Statistics relate to the measurement of probabilities, and probabilities are not truth.

Truth is actual, which means the probability of a true event is 1. Something is either true or it is not. If it is not true, it means it's probability is 0.  A probability between 0 and 1 means we don't know. This isn't knowledge. This is educated guesswork.

It has its place in certain fields but is largely useless in understanding real world events.

Some things are just too spontaneous and unique to meaningfully measure in a lab.

*Unique event: i.e. ALL events!

Comments