Name: 証拠を評価する。デジタル情報をナビゲートするクラッシュコース #6 (Evaluating Evidence: Crash Course Navigating Digital Information #6)
Uploaded: 2021-01-14T10:28:22.000Z
Duration: 13 min 21 s
Description: VoiceTubeの動画で発音を聞きながら英語表現を覚えよう！学べる英語：

Hi, I'm John Green, and this is Crash Course: Navigating Digital Information.

転換語

When you were a kid, did you ever hear the phrase “Because I said so”?

Like, I most often say that after my kids ask why they can't have m&Ms for dinner.

The answer to which, of course, is “you will get scurvy if you eat that way.”

But that just leads to more questions about scurvy, and them begging to take a multivitamin

so they can eat M&Ms--It's because I said so!

You listen to your parents because, you know, they're your parents.

And also because they can take your phone away.

But as you grow older, “because I said so” no longer cuts it.

If you told your boss you deserve a raise “because I said so” you're liable to

Do you think my fleet of lamborghinis pays for itself?

I've said it before and I'll say it again, if you want a raise, you need to learn how

You need to provide evidence that you deserve the raise, and that evidence needs to be convincing.

And that's how online information works, too.

Not only should you look for reliable sources of information, but they should provide convincing

So today we're going to focus on how to tell good evidence from bad evidence, and

maybe importantly, how to identify “Fine but that doesn't actually prove your point”

In the past few weeks, we've learned how to ask and answer the questions “Who said

that and why?” when we encounter new online information.

But those two questions alone aren't enough to properly evaluate information.

We need to add another question to our repertoire: “What is the evidence?”

Can't we just find a trustworthy source and believe whatever they say?

Well, yes, and it's important to find and trust reliable sources of information, the

credibility of their claims depends on the evidence provided to back them up.

Evidence could be anything, really -- text, photos, videos, data -- as long as it supports

a claim and gives you a good reason to believe it's true.

If someone is making a factual claim -- and not just voicing a subjective opinion -- then

they need to provide proof in order for us to believe it.

This classic tweet by comedian Nathan Fielder explains it all.

In the photo you see Nathan laughing, looking off camera.

The tweet reads “Out on the town having the time of my life with a bunch of friends.

They're all just out of frame, laughing too.”

To ruin the joke by explaining it, Nathan probably isn't out on the town with friends,

otherwise, he would show them laughing instead of this lonely selfie.

It's funny because the evidence doesn't back up the claim.

But often, when the evidence does not back up the claim, it's not funny.

As you probably know from just existing on the internet, it is really easy to hop online

Like, I know this is going to sound wild, but you can literally type anything you want

into this box and click tweet, and share it with the world.

Like, the only thing this box will not publish to the public is a thought longer than 280

But the same is true across social media: Politicians claim their opponents are bad

Conspiracy theorists take to YouTube to falsely claim the Earth is flat.

Celebrities use Instagram to claim they lost weight using lollipops.

And of course, on Tumblr everyone is claiming that your fave could never, and/or is problematic.

If a source provides no evidence at all to back up its claims, we should be suspicious

I mean, without evidence, we have no way to know if its claims are true -- and thus no

For instance, take a look at this Facebook post that went viral in the summer of 2018.

It says, “New Deadly Spider Spreads Across USA

Five people have died this week due to the bite of this deadly spider.

This spider was first seen in South Carolina in July.

Since then it has caused deaths in West Virginia, Tennessee and Mississippi.

At this time please make your family and friends aware.”

The source is a seemingly random Facebook user you don't know.

Although many posts you'll encounter on Facebook are from friends or friends of friends,

And if they're not public figures, you may not be able to verify their identity outside

So, to determine if their information is trustworthy, we need to look at the evidence.

The post features photos of an admittedly terrifying-looking spider.

But it doesn't include any other evidence.

It doesn't say what type of spider this is, where it typically lives, or how it traveled

from South Carolina to West Virginia without visiting Virginia.

Stan, are we sure that this deadly flying spider isn't real?

There are also, tellingly, no links to the news stories about the deaths that this spider

supposedly caused, because you know, there weren't any.

Also, there is nothing to suggest the government is studying an antidote.

Now, fact-checking site Snopes.com debunked this all pretty easily.

They searched reputable sources for deaths attributed to this spider and found nothing.

They also found the person who initially posted this hoax has started other hoaxes in the

In this case, the lack of evidence was reason to be very suspicious.

字幕リスト動画再生

証拠を評価する。デジタル情報をナビゲートするクラッシュコース #6 (Evaluating Evidence: Crash Course Navigating Digital Information #6)

relevant

deserve

evidence

determine