|
|
Of course there is nothing wrong with speculating on the
anticipated results of an experiment or study. Indeed, speculation of this
kind is precisely how experiments are conceived of and designed. In a
careful experiment it is even necessary to state the "experimental
hypothesis," which is, in effect, what we speculate will be the outcome of
the experiment.
It is perhaps because good experimental design requires us to speculate,
that mere speculation can sometimes pass as genuine evidence. The fallacy of
Speculative Evidence mimics good reasoning by correctly performing the
first step in the design of an experiment, namely the stating of
the anticipated results. However, the fallacy errs by then sneaking straight
to the conclusion without actually performing the experiment, i.e. treating
the anticipated results as if those results were already confirmed and could
be relied upon.
This seems like an obvious enough fallacy, so it is surprising how many
people confess to being guilty of it. I first spotted the fallacy by
observing my own tendency to treat my own speculations as if others should
be convinced by them. |