Is there a reverse of the anecdotal fallacy?

###posting as DudleyDowell###

People say "Oh that's just anecdotal" as though that prevents it from being true. But it seems to me that although it isn't a formal study, it doesn't preclude it from possibly being true.

There is an anecdotal fallacy, but that is the opposite… it is when someone provides an anecdote as a way to suggest, imply, or directly claim that a general rule is true (e.g., “Smoking does not kill… My grandfather smoked and lived until 101”).

As for your example, it certainly is fallacious. Concluding that something *cannot* be not true because it is an anecdote, is poor reasoning. For example, people often use anecdotes to help others understand a known truth. Claiming that because an anecdote was used, the point it was supporting was fallacious is problematic (kind of rare, so that is why there is probably no name for this). Most people complain about anecdotes in that they are not proper support for a claim (which is true), they rarely reject the claim as a result of the anecdote.