Personal experiences vs facts and statistics
This post was written by a student. It has not been fact checked or edited.
I think that facts and statistics made a big part in this discussion, however, I think that personal experiences are more important to report about the war in Ukraine and Russia.
The first example that supports my opinion is that personal experiences show you the reality. You see real people talking about their fears, worries and struggles. In statistics you just see the words or different diagrams. I think that facts and statistics doesn't touch you that much, as personal experiences would do. I would also say, that if you read/watch the news, personal experiences stay longer in your head than facts or statistics. You can see peoples struggles and fears e.g. fear of their life, children or home. I think that in your subconsciousness personal experiences stay more with you than you think. Afterwards you will think of the news again because the topic touched you more as it would do if you just saw some statistics. This is a fact that your brain/ you remember things you have seen more easily, when they touched you/ did something with your feelings. I can also report this from my own experiences.
One person who disagrees with my opinion could say that facts and statistics are the best way to report about the war, because statistics shows how the situation is in the whole country and not just for one person. However, I think that my argument is stronger because every person who dares to express his/ her opinion is important. They show us, how the war has an impact on their daily life. In statistics and facts, you couldn't see that, and I don't think that there are so many people who thinks about this without have seen a personal experience. Also statistics are mostly about how many people died and how many tanks they have got from other countries. Statistics often doesn't show the private life from people who life in the war zone / war country. But this is the most important! Without their opinions we couldn't really have an opinion about this topic.
In conclusion I can say that for me the personal experiences are the best way to report about the war, because they made other people be able to empathise and be able to relate to them more, than without having seen a personal experience.
Comments (7)
Although I totally agree with you, I think it depends on what you as an outstanding viewer want to know about or what is more “interesting” to you. Because if you rather want to know, how many people recently died or how many buildings got destroyed, the facts of a statistic as you said give you a more accurate picture of what is going on. Though if you want to know more about the story or the situation people are currently in (in Russia or Ukraine ), their personal experience and story is much more viewable in what people are going through rather than a statistic.
I totally get where you're coming from! Facts and statistics are like cold, hard numbers on a page—they give you the big picture, but they don't really grab your heart. It's like looking at a map of a country versus actually talking to someone from that place. Sure, the map shows you where the country is, but it doesn't show you the people who live there, their fears, and their dreams. Personal experiences, on the other hand, are like windows into people's souls. They let you see what life is really like, not just in terms of numbers, but in terms of feelings and emotions.
When you hear someone's story, it sticks with you like gum on your shoe. It makes you feel something—fear, sadness, hope. It’s way more powerful than just hearing about how many tanks were sent to a battlefield. It's like the difference between reading about a rainbow and actually seeing one stretch across the sky—it makes a world of difference. And I totally agree with you, personal experiences leave a mark on your brain. The numbers can be forgotten, but a person's struggle, their story, stays with you, like a tune you can't get out of your head.
Of course, stats are important for understanding the big picture, but they can feel distant and cold, like reading a textbook. Personal stories are warm and real—they pull you in and make you care. Without them, we might forget about the real lives behind the headlines. Isn’t it the people’s stories that truly make us understand and empathize with the pain and the hope?
Do you think we might start forgetting the stories if we focus too much on numbers?
Hi “modest wildcat”, thank you for your reply! I really liked how you explained and illustrate your opinion (which is the same as mine), with your example of the rainbow.
To your question: I think it depends to the person who saw a personal story. If a story hadn’t touched a person that much or even at all, I think that the person will forget the story if he/she/it saw too much numbers etc. But I also think that if the personal story touched a person and he/she/it thinks of it again, I think the story will stay longer in his/her/its mind.
Otherwise, as you said, the personal experiences and stories stick with us like gum on our shoes which I can agree too. Numbers are easily forgotten and after a while people don’t think of them again. It can be that they remember a few, but just because they connect something with them. And personal stories and experiences can be e.g. this connection.
In conclusion I’d say that stories couldn’t be forgotten this easily if they touched you. But if they didn’t, you won’t care about them, no matter if you saw too much numbers or not.
I agree because...
Personal stories state what is happening in people's lives. If we show facts it shows people just numbers or statistics rather than actual people or experiences therefore making it impersonal unlike personal stories. Personal stories talks about real life experiences, when actual people talk about their stories, it makes it relatable someone else can easily put or imagine them selves in the affected people's shoes, personal stories can invoke empathy and emotions in other people .
Furthermore, if facts and statistics are not used properly they can influence, convince, convert and mislead. Facts can create a certain view in someone's mind. For example, many Russians support the act of the invasion because of the statistics Russia is feeding them.
I also agree that personal stories show how people are struggling.
Facts do not let you know what is exactly happening in people's lives. As personal stories are remembered 22 times more than facts alone.
Thank you for your reply and also the example you bring in, by mentioning how Russia feed their own population with certain facts to change their minds. This is something new, I didn’t think of before. I agree to you that when facts aren’t used properly they can lead to influence, mislead and all in all some times also to wrongness.
You have amazing point and I totally agree with your standpoint. I thought you were able talk about the topic with amazing empathy and understanding, so well done for that. I think that we as humans need communication, which is why I think the only real way of knowing how somebody feels and what they are going through is by talking to them or hearing from them personally. I mean, what are we weighting on write now? A website which let's us communicate with people all around the globe to find out what other people feel and think about a certain subject. Talking is what keeps us sain, so I don't think that the example of the Russian and Ukrain war is any different. We should not only rely on statistics and scientifically proven reports because even they have their flaws.
Thank you
Your perspective is thoughtful and I agree that personal experiences are vital in humanizing the realities of war. Stories of individuals, e.g., families fleeing homes, children grappling with fear or communities clinging to hope, forge an emotional connection that raw stats can't. These narratives of actual people anchor tangible concepts like "conflict" or "casualties" to lived humanity, making the suffering tangible. When we, us, hear a parent describe sleepless nights under bombardment from drones or see a photo of a child's makeshift bunker, it resonates deeply because it mirrors universal emotions: love, fear, resilience. Neuroscience supports this, emotional stimuli trigger the amygdala, enhancing memory retention, which explains why personal accounts linger in our minds longer than numbers on a page.
That said, stats aren't without merit. Data contextualizes individual stories which reveals system patterns: migration trends, economic collapse or military aid. Without this, we risk reducing war to isolated tragedies rather than a full scale war. A death toll of "10,000" can feel impersonal but learning one dream lost, comels empathy. Personal stories expose gaps in data, how can you quantify grief, psychological toll or the destruction of normalcy?
Your point about subconscious impact is key. Stories shape collective thoughts and coverage which spur action. Media coverage of Syrian refugee Alan Kurdi's body on a beach gathered global accounts. In the end, personal accounts aren't complementary, they are essential to ethical storytelling.
I agree because personal narratives serve as the emotional core of war reporting, bridging the gap between abstract statistics and human suffering. They not only foster empathy but also drive awareness and action. Without these stories, data risks becoming detached from lived experiences, dulling its urgency.
In my perspective , I think that both are great and crucial in this war as :
Personal experiences provide a humanized perspective on the conflict . For example Vector from kyiv whose home was destroyed by the russian forces after 20 years of building it . Personal stories are incredibly significant as thet share strong emotions such as trauma , stress and anxiety , which is crucial as it helps in understanding the scene better as it is easier to understand which is , no doubt , crucial in such a war . It highlights struggles , bravery and resilience families and people faced in the war .
On the other hand , Facts and statistics share information and elaboration in a a different way . It can show information as the detrimental effect of the war on the economic consequences in both russia and Ukraine . Data of places destructed and lose of businesses which shows a deep result that is made with efforts to solved the problems . Numbers language ( statistics ) can show even the humanitarian needs as approximated amount of food and more trying to deliver aid and cover all human needs in this war ! It can also have the global impact of the war as both countries' international relations and the security of the country ; hence , it is crucial too .
I agree because both personal experiences and statistics are essential in understanding the full impact of war. Personal stories like Vector’s make the suffering tangible, fostering empathy and emotional connection. Meanwhile, statistics provide a broader context, revealing economic, humanitarian, and geopolitical consequences. Together, they create a comprehensive and compelling narrative that deepens understanding and drives meaningful action.
I believe the most effective is a combination of both, personal stories provide an emotional connection and is easier to persuade people using your story, because you were there and you saw it happen to you and the people around you, as you tell your story you help the audience to get into the story and maybe feel the pain you went through. On the other hand, facts and statistics are also a good way of obtaining data that is objective and reliable which offers insights into trends and pattern. Studying the facts and statistics is also good for humanitarian support.