A tale of epistemology

From
http://www.suicidology-online.com/pdf/SOL-2010-1-5-18.pdf

Review
Edwin S. Shneidman on Suicide
Antoon A. Leenaars

"
The following is an excerpt of my responses to
questions from Mr. Dan Hyatt, counsel for the
defense.
Hyatt: The army investigator, Mr. Olds, has testified
earlier in this case. He offered an opinion that it was
unusual to see two instrumentalities when either
attempting or committing suicide. Do you have an
opinion with respect to that statement?
Ess: Yes, in a picayune way he is right. But in an
overall way he is howlingly wrong. I'll tell you about
each of those if I may.
Hyatt: Please.
Ess: Suicide itself, fortunately, is an event of
infrequent occurrence. So that you can make
tabulations of methods and all sorts of things. A lot of
events are infrequent, but if the incontrovertible
evidence is that the person has done it, then you can't
say that the person has not done it simply because it
is infrequent. Using two methods is much more
infrequent than using one. That's true. But then to
argue from that to this particular case is a tyro's
error. It's a mistake that freshmen, undergraduates in
my Death and Suicide course at UCLA, make of
going from statistics to an individual case. Statistics
are an interesting background for a case but they
don't tell you about that case. Here we are talking
about this case.
Hyatt: Mr. Olds also testified that he thought it was
very rare based on his study of army personnel and
their dependents, his data base, that it was very rare
to find a dependent female to commit suicide or
attempt to commit suicide in the nude. Do you have
an opinion about that?
Ess: Yes, Well, I would say to him, "That's true.
That's absolutely true. But you're really not seriously
making an argument that that has a bearing on this
case, are you?" And if he said "Yes," my already low
opinion of him would drop precipitously.
Hyatt: What value do you see of statistical
information such as that offered by Mr. Olds in
determining the cause of death?
Ess: In a particular case?
Hyatt: Yes.
Ess: None. It's background material.
Hyatt: Is the utilization of statistics in the manner
testified by Mr. Olds a scientifically acceptable
method, or is that data reasonably relied upon by
other experts in your field as a means of drawing
conclusion?
Ess: If your question is, is it a scientifically credited
method the way he has done it, the answer is no.
Hyatt: And why would that be?
Ess: The technical response is that in these matters,
in suicidology, the confusion of statisticaldemographic-
epidemiological-numerical data with
the etiology or outcome of any particular individual
case, to make a judgment about that individual case
on the basis of statistics is a methodological error.
Hyatt: Why is it a methodological error?
Ess: Because it has things backwards. It isn't that the
statistics generate the case; it is that the cases taken
in long series or large numbers generate the statistics.
To say that it is rare is not to say that it did not occur.
Hyatt: What do you say when you hear that Peggy
Campbell was nude on the evening of her death?
Ess: I would say, "Gee whiz, isn't' that unusual."
But then to argue as he did that it couldn't be suicide
on that account is a howler. It boggles the mind.
Where did his logic go?
Hyatt: And would you have the same opinion as to
the use of two instrumentalities?
Ess: Yes, sure. What is persuasive is the whole
history of her lifetime…. (Leenaars, 1999, pp. 433-
434).
"