 鲜花( 5)  鸡蛋( 6)
|
本帖最后由 bigsnail 于 2012-6-7 11:17 编辑
L+ q% ^+ a, k; D& s) X$ s3 V) c& E( `2 U' i& v1 G
open your mouth and wash it with detergent$ Z4 |& A4 b8 X7 O2 w L, q
$ x: B# T& c( l4 ~7 P* A7 e
sure there is no rigorous statistical evidence because there is no way to manipulate in the experiment so as to fully justify the causality.
8 y5 J3 n1 Q! l; h5 f2 Z
6 J% h" [* e9 X- ?, rAnd remember: ! r F: o4 J% A
"there is no evidence that A holds" ]9 U( Q0 ~: W9 c- _
does NOT mean
8 V5 M! B- W# _. Q# }% v# b* V9 B"there is evident that A does not hold".
! T6 j( j5 {( |& u# ~In fact, A could hold. ) b) E& x0 g' @1 h0 D, ?# Q
It's a matter like observability vs objective existence.7 Q: n3 ~3 ]# \& k( D4 L2 |; D$ w
So what you say doesn't constitute a refutation.
( d0 i d! w: \8 q0 N1 r% ^9 X8 h, [
It's mainly by argumentation. See for example:
6 R& ? G- z' v7 X/ V* [) o% s A, `
7 I/ y2 E- T. |' W" \"Does the death penalty cost less than life in prison without parole?"
0 r$ E6 j. ]7 @in
: D, p0 y+ c R- \- |9 K' Ohttp://deathpenalty.procon.org/view.answers.php?questionID=001000
* k D% K) j, T1 }
" B' z9 W- q' x9 Z; v/ gRemember, things are more complicated than what you think.
2 u4 G' d' @ Y, A! r |
|