<story><title>Joel on Software: Anecdotes</title><url>http://www.joelonsoftware.com/items/2008/11/18.html</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>DaniFong</author><text>The book review is impressively hypocritical. She ruthlessly disdains Malcolm Gladwell&apos;s use of selectively chosen biographical examples and anecdotal evidence, and then proceeds to selectively cherry-pick examples, to optimally infuriate politically correct sensibilities. She then lampoons him for incompleteness.&lt;p&gt;She mentions only one of the many larger studies that he cites, the Terman study. Was the Terman study wide ranging? Yes. Does it fit Gladwell&apos;s hypothesis that the opportunities one is offered matter? Yes. Does she show it to be incorrect? No. Does she attack any part of it? No. Does she mention any of the other studies that Gladwell mentions? That major hockey players are nearly all born in the first three months of the year? Ericsson&apos;s studies on expertise? Flynn&apos;s analysis on historic chinatowns? No!&lt;p&gt;If I present a theory, and back it up with a bunch of other data points, one should not be able to pick out a single data point, claim that I am basing my loose hypothesis on anecdotal evidence, and say I am irresponsible. This is what is being done.</text></comment>
<story><title>Joel on Software: Anecdotes</title><url>http://www.joelonsoftware.com/items/2008/11/18.html</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>pg</author><text>A lot of essays are extrapolated anecdotes.  It&apos;s not an intrinsically evil form.  You just have to do it right.</text></comment>