Evidence of Evidence

In general, what are the parameters for something to be considered evidence?

Technical definitions of evidence;
Oxford: the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid.
Wikipedia: anything presented in support of an assertion.

Webster: an outward sign : INDICATION. something that furnishes proof : TESTIMONY

These definitions seem to be surprisingly vague, with a lack of specific parameters, but perhaps that makes sense. According to Oxford, information only has to indicate that a belief is true. That which counts as [indicating], could be subjective. The Wikipedia definition seems to have a similar meaning, but even less specific. Something [presented in support] could be subjective, as well. Webster outlines evidence as an [indication] or something that [furnishes] proof. Both of which terms, also seem to be open for interpretation and understanding by the parties involved in any context of evidence.

If interpretation is a component, of whether or not any given information supports a proposition (and can be considered evidence), then it seems to come down to the best estimate of any individuals involved. There may be many circumstances where it is extremely obvious that the presented information supports the proposition, but theoretically, no information is 100% certain, and therefore the validity of any information, is still only some degree of probable, within a spectrum of probability (further hypothesis of this concept, in a post from 1.5yrs ago; Indistinctivity). If the validity of any information is only somewhere within a range, that means anyones interpretation, is only is only a best estimate. I further questioned the concept of; every interpretation of someone resulting in a reaction, being virtually a best estimate, in my last post; Best Guess. 

Since, that which can count as evidence (according to these definitions), seems to be based on interpretation (or “best guess”), perhaps it is a requirement that all parties within the context, agree that the information does indeed indicate the proposition. Agreement seems to be required in any general circumstances, for information to be considered “evidence”. This seems to make sense, since if information is being used to try to convince someone else of a proposition, the information has no function within the context, if the receiver of information, does not agree. 

Besides evidence in general, there are more specific types of evidence, which may require more specific parameters. 3 types of evidence that I found through quick research, which seem reasonably applicable to general situations, would be; Empirical, Logical, & Anecdotal. Here are basic definitions:

Empirical evidence is information acquired by observation or experimentation.
Logical evidence is used to prove or disprove an idea using reasoning.
Anecdotal evidence consists of stories that have been experienced by a person.

Empirical evidence is commonly used in science to “prove” something with repeated procedures of experiments or observations. If the recorded data from the experiments shows the same result through enough consistent reproductions, it can be regarded to be enough evidence for proof. The # of times the experiment and results are reproduced, seems to be relative to the degree of evidence. Even within this scientific type of evidence, there still seems to be no specific parameters for quantity of reproductions, and degree of accuracy of measurements within the experiments or observations, which is required to be evidence. It is all a range of degrees of evidence, and perhaps is still up to subjective interpretation for how strong of evidence is illustrated, based on # of experiments, and accuracy of measurements. 

Logical evidence seems to be similar to general evidence, since it strongly requires subjective interpretation. It involves, more specifically, concepts (perhaps rather than observations or statistics) of cause and effect which are relevant to the proposition. Understanding of the incorporation of more concepts of function, is likely to be involved, but the process of understanding, still involves individual interpretation (which is a best estimate).

Anecdotal evidence is information of an experience, relayed by someone. Similarly, the validity and accuracy of that information of experience, requires interpretation.

In general, that which is considered to be evidence, seems to be on a broad scale of degree of applicability. Information which can be considered to indicate a proposition, even to the slightest degree, could potentially be considered evidence. Whether information is in the form of; data of experiments, interaction of relative concepts, or stated experience, it seems to require interpretation and agreement of parties involved, using a best estimate for the degree of which it supports the proposition. But in all, applicability and accuracy is open to interpretation, of this proposed; Evidence of Evidence.