You've learned to spot credible sources. But here's a tricky problem: what if evidence is totally true and from a great source, but still doesn't help prove the point?
This happens more than you think. Even honest, accurate evidence can mislead us.
Engagement Message
Can you think of a time when someone gave you "proof" that felt off somehow?
Meet the twin traps: irrelevant evidence and insufficient evidence. Both involve true facts that don't actually support the claim being made.
It's like using a hammer to prove you're a good cook - the hammer is real, but it's the wrong tool!
Engagement Message
Which trap do you think trips people up more often?
Irrelevant Evidence: True facts that don't connect to the claim. Someone argues "Video games cause violence" and shows that violent crime exists in cities with GameStops.
Both facts are true, but one doesn't prove the other.
Engagement Message
What's wrong with this "evidence" about video games?
Insufficient Evidence: The right type of proof, but not nearly enough. Like claiming "Exercise prevents all disease" based on one study of 12 people for 2 weeks.
The study might be valid, but it's way too small to support such a big claim.
Engagement Message
What would make this exercise claim stronger?
Here are your two quick questions to test any evidence:
- "Does this directly relate to the claim?" (Relevance test)
- "Is this enough to support such a strong conclusion?" (Sufficiency test)
These work even when the evidence comes from excellent sources.
Engagement Message
