‹ Back

We often use personal experience as evidence.

“I know someone who…”

“This happened to me…”

“My friend did this, and…”

And suddenly, an individual experience becomes proof of a universal truth.

I call these anecdotal annexures; the personal stories we attach to an argument to make it appear more authoritative. The problem is that an anecdote can illustrate an idea without proving it. One person can smoke for fifty years without developing a serious illness. Another can exercise every day and still become unwell.

Neither story, by itself, establishes a rule.

Yet humans naturally trust stories because stories are memorable, emotional, and relatable. We often find it easier to believe something we can picture than something supported by statistics we cannot emotionally experience.

Anecdotes have value. They provide context. They give statistics a human face. They can reveal possibilities that deserve further investigation, but they become dangerous when they replace evidence.

Your experience is real.

That does not automatically make your interpretation universally true. Perhaps the problem is not anecdotal evidence itself. It is our tendency to promote the anecdote from example to evidence, and then from evidence to certainty.

Sometimes a story deserves to be heard. It just does not always deserve to become the conclusion because one person's experience can tell us what happened. It cannot necessarily tell us why it happened, how often it happens, or whether it will happen again.