Data Conveniency Principle
It’s not a formal rule of logic, but is useful in many situations:
If there are multiple explanations for an event, the explanations that fit the data are more likely to be true than ones that try to explain inconvenient data away.
As a simple example, let’s say a parent asks his two young children if they had just brushed their teeth. They both say yes, and so the parent checks their toothbrushes.
Child A: His toothbrush is still wet from use. Child A’s explanation of events is at least plausible since it fits the evidence.
Child B: Her toothbrush is completely dry. The parent asks about it, and Child B says she dried off the toothbrush after brushing. Needless to say, this is trying to explain away the available evidence, and is less likely to be true. (In fact, the parent’s explanation, that she didn’t brush her teeth, turned out to be correct.)
And of course this isn’t based on something that happened in real life. Hi, Rachel!
thank...