From impossible to improbable: small step or giant leap ?

Simon: Isn’t it ludicrous that some people think that the moon landings are a hoax? Bloody conspiracy-theorists! The moon landings happened, the evidence is incontrovertible.

Thomas: What is that evidence?

Simon: This article tells and shows how photographs taken by NASA's reconnaissance lunar orbiter reveal human footprints on the moon.

Thomas: Yeah, that seems compelling, but maybe the photographs could be fakes. Or maybe NASA actually landed a mechanical lunar rover on the moon that has two wheels on each side with boots in place of tyre treads, and it was set to "walk" around a bit. Voila! Footprints.

Simon: Aww, come on, that's just stupid.

Thomas: Stupid, yes. But possible, right?

Simon: No way. They have soil and rocks that they brought back from the moon that are not found anywhere on earth.

Thomas: Well, you’ve set up an interesting paradox: these rocks not found anywhere on earth are currently on the earth; they're found in NASA labs and museums. How can we be sure they are not elsewhere too? Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. And besides, have you seen these rocks? Are you a geologist? Can you confirm that they absolutely cannot be of this earth?

Simon: No the experts have made this judgment. I trust the experts.

Thomas: Sure, I trust experts too. But I also know that it is sometimes wise to ask for a second opinion. Experts do not always get it right. Indeed, they often disagree: it's almost certain that for any expert opinion, you will be able to find another expert who has a different view.

Simon: Oh this is silly. The theory that the moon landings are a hoax is simply impossible.

 

Thomas: I'm not asking you to admit that there were no moon landings, or no humans walked on the moon, or even that they are a hoax. I'm asking you whether you might be wrong about man walking on the moon?

Simon: While I acknowledge the points you are making, let me respond with the 17th century idiom that your words 'doth butter no parsnips with me'. In the modern vernacular, I ain't buying it.

Thomas: Let me respond to your parsnips quote with another bizarre one from the same century called Cromwell's rule: 'I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible that you may be mistaken?'  

 

Simon: What?

 

Thomas: Cromwell's rule says that anyone who is 100% adamant about their view is in trouble for two reasons: (a) they might be wrong and (b) they are blind to this possibility.

 

Simon: Ah, OK, I think I’m beginning to understand. You’re trying to crack me open to the idea that a hoax about the moon landings is possible. So let me respond using the words of an Aussie character Jasper Jones: 'Course it's possible. I don't reckon it's likely but'. And yes, I see that I can’t make the claim that the hoax is absolutely impossible.

 

Thomas: Yes, exactly. It's a small step, but with enormous implications.

 

Simon: But you have to make a giant leap to get over a problem that remains. Your view presents an absurdity, namely that the impossible is not possible at all! 😂 

 

---

Course it's possible. I don't reckon it's likely but.
 -- words spoken by Jasper Jones in Jasper Jones, Craig Silvey

 

Induction is the glory of Science, and the scandal of Philosophy

   -- C.D. Broad, Commemorative Address at The Bacon Tercentenary, (1926)

Words are but wind that do from men proceed;

None but Chamelions on bare Air can feed;

Great men large hopeful promises may utter;

But words did never Fish or Parsnips butter

   -- John Taylor, Epigrammes (1651)

 

I never made a mistake in my life.

I thought I did once,

but I was wrong.

  -- attributed to Charles M. Schulz, creator of Peanuts

Excuse, pardon, or forgive others ?

What does it take for me to excuse, pardon, or forgive others?

 

Well, it depends!

 

Beer Spills

 

If someone is pushing past me in a pub on their way to the bar or to the toilet, that person may say to me as they bump into me, "excuse me" or "pardon me."

 

S/he, the bumper, is asking to be excused or pardoned for a minor infraction, namely endangering or even manifesting a beer spill. 

 

While it is technically a question (will you excuse/pardon me?), it is typically offered more as a declarative statement in which the bumper expects me to excuse or pardon him or her. 

 

In fact, I might even be considered rather rude if I did not excuse or pardon someone who made me spill my beer, especially after s/he asked to be excused/pardoned.

 

Sometimes, if I'm minding my own business drinking a beer, and someone bumps into me without saying anything and spills my beer, I might get irritated enough to bump back by saying "excuse me?" or "pardon me?" In this context, my words are offered as a gentle, ironic rebuff. The double irony is that my words mark some disinclination to excuse or pardon the bumper.

In this beer-spilling sense, excusing and pardoning and even forgiving someone are synonymous. To excuse or pardon someone who causes a beer spill is little more than a politesse. And a rebuke by the bumpee with an "excuse me?" or "pardon me?" is a reminder to the perhaps thoughtless bumper of the need for this politesse.

 

Big Spills

 

But how about the situations in life where the bump is something rather more substantial than a beer spill? Maybe an oil spill with economic, financial and ecological consequences. Or a physical assault perhaps resulting in a literal blood spill. Or maybe something more emotional as in a metaphorical breaking of the heart and copious tears are spilled.