Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Jedi Guy

(3,185 posts)

5. Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you're saying here, but...

Reply to genxlib (Original post)

Sat Feb 13, 2021, 02:45 PM

Feb 2021

This sounds a lot like "he exists, therefore he's guilty." It'd be like a prosecutor in a murder trial pointing at the defendant and saying, "There he is right there, so clearly he did it, clearly he's guilty." That's not proof of guilt by any standard, though.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

5 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Reframing the question [View all] genxlib Feb 2021 OP

I'm sorry to have to disagree with you, but... SkeezerRedux Feb 2021 #1

That is kinda my point genxlib Feb 2021 #2

OK. I must have misinterpreted your post. I'll stand corrected. SkeezerRedux Feb 2021 #3

Actual Causation is usually proved by a "but for" test Stallion Feb 2021 #4

Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you're saying here, but... Jedi Guy Feb 2021 #5