Oh, but please try...it would amuse me
Regarding common sense; you're right, absence of proof does not prove its absence, but there comes a point at which the pragmatist in you must recognise that the complete, overwhelming absence of proof is pretty damning and that if you believe in that then you might as well believe in your latent ability to transform into a 15-ft blue gibbon.
(LongJohnBaldry, Fri 19 Nov 2010, 11:11, 1 reply, 15 years ago)

I agree with you completely, but common sense and the utter lack of prood still does not merit 'demonstrably'
I'm a bit busy, otherwise I'd 'shop Monty as a massive blue gibbon ;)
( Labia Majora You keep on talking but it makes no sense at all, Fri 19 Nov 2010, 11:16, Reply)

It doesn't, I agree. Though I think this has become a semantic argument than a philosophical one. 'Demonstrably' was the wrong choice of word, it just sounded better than 'Almost Certainly.'
I do hope you have free time and inclination later on.
(LongJohnBaldry, Fri 19 Nov 2010, 11:17, Reply)

It is more semantic
But in philosophical discussions you have to be very precise with language, just as you do in any kind of debate. It's one way my philosophy degree helps me in my job.
( Labia Majora You keep on talking but it makes no sense at all, Fri 19 Nov 2010, 11:20, Reply)