Kayla Eady

Ways of Knowing
May 6th, 2016
Critical Analysis: HTTAWT Chapter 5
Personal Experience as Evidence
The main claim made by the authors during chapter 5 of How to Think About Weird
Things Is that science can be used as a method to avoid errors commonly made by humans
when basing beliefs solely on personal experience. The reading explains reasons that personal
experience is not as reliable as scientific method. The authors explain that the human brain can
be unreliable when it comes to memory, perception and experiences that do not accurately depict
reality. Authors describe things like confirmation bias, when humans only look for evidence that
supports their believed hypothesis, and pareidolia, the trick or illusion where we see vague
stimulus as something it is not, to explain why personal experience cannot be relied upon. The
authors end the chapter by comparing personal experience as evidence to draw conclusions from
to the scientific method in which these things are taken into account and measures are taken to
counteract their affects on conclusions. The authors claim is well supported with arguments that
are valid and not fallacious, the arguments are strong and confirm the theory although sometimes
leaning towards complete discount of personal experience rather than a warning. The authors are
suggesting that personal experience should be considered evidence under extreme caution and
that by being aware of potential causes of misconception people learn to scrutinize them and the
conclusions drawn from them.

The authors argue that claims and beliefs based in personal belief should be taken under caution.
Premise 1: Personal experiences do not always reflect reality, therefore conclusions about
reality should not be based solely on perception. The argument is This argument is valid

and deductive, this premise follows the structure of affirming the antecedent, the
antecedent being the claim. This is expressed in explicit logic through examples in the
text and supporting evidence.
Sub Premise 1: There are unintended byproducts to humans natural survival
techniques called heuristics.
Sub Premise 2: Our memories, senses and perceptions are not always accurate and
can be skewed from the truth by things like stress, perceptual construction, and
expectation.
Premise 2: Conclusions drawn from controlled studies often have less error than those
drawn strictly anecdotal evidence, therefore conclusions from scientific methods can be
trusted more than those drawn from personal experience. The argument follows the
structure of affirming the antecedent and is deductive and valid. This premise is argued
with explicit logic that is explained and summarized after such explanation.
Sub Premise 1: We often look at only relevant evidence when determining the
validity of a claim and not taking into consideration hypothesis that differ from
the originally conceived ones and evidence that support said hypothesis.

The main claim the authors make is easy to draw out from the text and well supported. The first
premise is supported with definitions of what can occur inside humans experiences that make
them untrustworthy and the authors provide real world examples and exerts to support this
premise. One example that compellingly argues the premise to be true is the examination of a
perceptual construction, or manufactured perception, that causes the human brain to make sense
of vague stimuli and the case of the man on the mars. Where humans recognized patterns in

images of mars landscape that were blurry, the human brain using survival techniques of
recognizing faces in things that are not faces at all. The evidence supports the claims and makes
the argument strong as well as valid. The sub premises to the first premise go into more depth
about the mechanisms that cause perceptual construction and misconception in the human brain
and how it operates and makes sense of the world. The second premise offers a solution to the
problems of perceptual construction and a better way to test hypothesis and draw conclusions.
The argument uses evidence of personal experiences and perceptual constructions that did not
turn out well and explains why the alternative scientific method takes these into account to better
validate the evidence.

In conclusion the authors use definitions and explanations about human perception to explain
why personal experience is not always valid and support these claims with evidence and real
world examples. These arguments are sound and strong and are generally explicitly stated and
explained using logic. Though the authors provide outstanding evidence against personal
experience as a means of basing all beliefs without question they sometimes forget to argue for
them as well and let the readers decide how to view this issue themselves. They more so argue in
complete opposition to personal belief and make a strong suggestion about what should be done
when it comes to drawing conclusions and trusting personal experience.

(Word Count: 783)