From: RSBrenchley@aol.com
Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2001 12:30:11 EDT
To: BiologicalBeekeeping@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: Wintering Notes

Eric writes:

> I like your observation notes highly. Just a comment on a word, but
> with no big stressing from my side. Just that I'm a little allergic to the
> word "anecdotal". It has been used here in Sweden in some circles in
> a very down grading way.

It doesn't necessarily mean that the evidence is false, though I agree it
can be used in that way. People in a position of power, let's say, who don't
want to admit there's a problem, may dismiss reports as 'anecdotal evidence' as a way of avoiding the need to take them seriously. I'm not sure that this has ever been put in a formal way anywhere, but there's a sort of hierarchy of evidence; if I tell you that there aren't many Black Methodist preachers about (to take a particular concern of mine, which has nothing to do with beekeeping), then that's anecdotal evidence. If I write to the Methodist Recorder about it, then that's something which has been published, and it's worth a bit more, since if I was talking rubbish I could then be refuted in print. If I do some serious ethnic monitoring (which I have done as part of my MPhil research) and can publish actual figures, then that's the best sort of evidence, which most people would regard as 'proof'. I think there are often good reasons for weighting evidence like this, but I do feel that the existence of a body of anecdotal evidence for something important should, ideally, trigger serious research. Researchers should be at the service of ordinary beekeepers (or ordinary Methodists), rather than people pursuing some other agenda, which can, regretfully, be used by the powerful to suppress facts which should be revealed.

Regards,

Robert Brenchley,
Birmingham, UK.

RSBrenchley@aol.com