As a reader, which are you more receptive to: information that claims to represent all of the cases under discussion or that which claims to represent only some of the cases under discussion?
122833
I guess it really depends on the context. But, come to think of it, deductive claims seem to have a greater impact.
33779
Court proceedings differ in each case that is brought before a judge...\nIt is basically the paperwork and story of each case to be presented and any evidence to use...
529158
But how much of your "information" is filtered through a system that may not give you the whole truth?\n\nAny source for news will have a bias, regardless of the intention.\n\nNo offense, what proof do you have to support the 90% number you quote?
167669
What is your source for this information?
23050
What the guy above me said...or if they are primary source documents. Those are the best sources for material on a research essay. Who better to quote than the actual person who said it?
11653
The "truth" is very subjective and usually a lot more complicated than the media pundits and headline readers would lead you to believe.  Print media in general does a better job of being thorough.  Your best bet is to get your news from multiple sources and critically evaluate as best you can what you are being told and by whom.
433249
If someone is claiming, insisting on something, he has to proove it first. \nDefense or deny or apologise...for what? \n\nWhich government, which history claims that tall tale? Turkish documents are open for everybody. But none of Us or French or Armeinan acepted to come and discuss on these documents. THEY only rejected the Ottoman documents, photos, arguments. \n\nIf someone is claiming, he must proove it. And then he can ask the reasons of denial.
563571
Both sides like to throw around the "stupid" label. Labels are just that: stupid. I had a little disagreement with a guy earlier about WMD's in Iraq. He went on to post a bunch of sites that backed up his claims. Of course, he had only read the headline, the actual story disputed everything he said.\n\nI wouldn't read too much into it. People let their fingers get ahead of their brain. If you do a search for questions that include the term "cite sources" you will see that most of the respondents don't. It's not stupidity. Most are just offended that either you don't agree or you DARE to question them.\n\nI agree with sunshine. The majority of what you see here is personal opinion, not documented facts. Does my personal opinion have any less weight than anyone elses simply because they do not agree with it?
558225
I agree. I often give complete answers, with lots of research to back them up, and am only rewarded with two points. It can be pretty frustrating.
414916
And most agree that information attained in this manner is suspect at best
181477
It helps the reader identify with the subject matter.
206240
A.  People like stories are are more likely to pay attetnion.\nB.  Stories are more likely to be passed along.\nC.  Jesus wanted us to think.  He gave us the facts but its up to us do search it out for ourselves.
601881
assume suppose to be the case, without proof.\npresume suppose that something is the case on the basis of probability; take for granted that something exists or is the case.
182221
A general part of a particular opens up a whole lot of questions. Beg ginning student of physics guess I would be of thee. So, for your question, #1 is truth for you at this time, the other only asks of itself.
526108
I found lost of helpful tips on the issues which are interesting to me. But I have also learned about the psychology of people and how some ask questions but only want to hear opinions that are similar to theirs, how some others refuse to hear different opinions even if it makes sense and how to some people choosing to attack others and spreading false information is more important than investing their time to get some benefit. It's really amazing how some people make accounts for the sole reason of provoking, or offending other ones and then pretend they're under attack!
431446
tell only the facts and that is it..dont add to it. dont make it more than what it was..only state the facts.
608382
1. The author is a first-hand source. He or she was actually part of the action or was there to witness it.\n\n2. The source is written based on information taken from other credible sources.