"Cyli" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 00:01:30 -0500, "Wolfgang"
wrote:


"Cyli" wrote in message
. ..
On Sat, 13 Aug 2005 21:51:09 -0400, "Frank Reid"
moc.deepselbac@diersicnarf wrote:

For the new camper, the
careless camper, the just plain dingbat or drunkie, the odds get much
heavier. "Hold my beer while I go pet / scare / fight the bear, will
ya'?" "He's in cooler. Get the cooler back from him." "Little
Jimmie, there's a bear there. Run away. Run away. Run fast!" "Oh,
let the dog loose. It'll chase the bear away." "Grab all the food
and hide in the tent with it." "Little Jimmie, take a donut over
there to feed the bear, we'll get a picture."

Hey, Wolfgang, we done did that whole list in under 10 minutes (I'll
substitute you for Little Jimmy and the dog). Coool. I guess I qualify
as
the new, careles, dingbat, dunkie camper.


Gee, you're harsh on yourself. I'd only have thought careless. And
that only because I didn't think you'd properly taken care for
raccoons or 'possums. Since no one had informed you there was a camp
garbage bear. Maybe dingbat on the running part. But the bear
already had food and you guys are a tad bigger than a kid, so, as was
proven, were pretty safe.

Not exactly what those in the sciences would call a rigorous proof.

Wolfgang
um.....well, o.k., maybe the neurosciences.

You're still alive, right?

Even here in ROFF I'd expect most to accept the mere fact of our testimonial
evidence (irrespective of the specific content thereof) as acceptable and
sufficient to prove that we did indeed survive.

Only anecdotal evidence, but it worked.
Each anecdote is a datum. Enough data can make for provisional proof.
However, we only have one datum, so I'd not rely on it,
scientifically. Only in this one pragmatic case.

Cyli

The English language, she is a slippery beast. A single anecdote delivered
by the protagonist is rock solid proof that he or she survived whatever
adventure is under consideration. On the other hand, the testimonial
evidence of millions of survivors does nothing to establish even provisional
proof that say, warfare for example, is safe. In short, the ex post facto
determination that an activity is safe based solely on the survival of the
participants is fatally flawed. This is precisely the sort of logic that
leads people to dip their children's hands in a pot of honey so that they
can get a photo of a bear licking it off.

Wolfgang