From: oldernow@dev.null   
      
   On 2025-04-06, Richmond  wrote:   
      
   > Only if you require proof of everything. But actually, making   
   > assumptions is quite normal. There is no reason you can't assume that   
   > sense evidence is a source of knowledge, without being able to prove   
   > it. But what you have done is said that it is problematic to manage   
   > without it and therefore someone else must prove it is false. How could   
   > someone prove than sense evidence is not a source of knowledge? by   
   > proving that no piece of knowledge was ever derived from sense evidence?   
      
   The proof is in the believing.   
      
   Or so "I" believe, at any rate....   
      
   --   
   NPC's dutifully ignored.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)