“What do you call a story that has limited data points, limited factual data points, that you fill in with your ideas and beliefs? A conspiracy.” — Brené Brown
Disconnecting The Dots
Zac Scy
52

First of all, it’s a nice, concise statement. It looks good italicized and probably makes a handsome t-shirt or bumper sticker. But it’s a generalization. In that sense taken out of context, it’s pretty much meaningless and less then helpful.

If your beliefs about whatever is involved in the ‘story’ are correct, then you can make what is commonly known as ‘an educated guess’ about the truth or falsity of the ‘story.’ On the other hand, if your beliefs about ‘whatever’ are incorrect because you saw a tv show on ‘whatever’ and now you’re an ‘expert’, then yes - you’re guess at that point is what is commonly know as ‘taking a shot in the dark.’

I love Oprah, I really do. But some of the ideas she promotes do more damage than good. This is one of them. At best I’d say in general, this is a good starting point for examining a ‘story.’ But if we only made decisions about things that had overwhemling evidence and data pointing in a ‘correct’ direction, we’d never do anything.

As I’ve said before, and I’ll say it again - we need more people ‘correctly’ interpreting the data we already have, and fewer people gathering the ‘wrong’ data. Garbage in - garbage out.