Alisa is right that an existential sentence is in principle easier to prove than its negative. Just produce a specimen. I bet she filched it from Karl Popper. The negation takes another universal premise to prove it from. But God is a harder nut. If God supporters could produce the specimen, they'd still need to prove uniqueness and the requisite universal properties. God opposers try to argue they do not need that hypothesis. Thing is the supporters clearly feel that need. It's not logic, it's a eusocial insect's builtin circuit. Less stupid egomaniacs are aware of its usefulness as a mind numbing anesthesiac, opium for the masses. Fiction or fact, its a great hypothesis. It would deserve inventing if it did not come pre-installed. Alisa was a silly hag.
ellauri147.html on line 866: The effect was first described in 1878 by Francis Galton. He had devised a technique called composite photography, which he believed could be used to identify 'types' by appearance, which he hoped would aid medical diagnosis, and even criminology through the identification of typical criminal faces. Galton's hypothesis was that certain groups of people may have common facial characteristics. To test the hypothesis, he created photographic composite images of the faces of vegetarians and criminals to see if there was a typical facial appearance for each. Galton overlaid multiple images of faces onto a single photographic plate so that each individual face contributed roughly equally to a final composite face. The resultant "averaged" faces did little to allow the a priori identification of either criminals or vegetarians, failing Galton's hypothesis. However, unexpectedly Galton observed that the composite image was more attractive than the component faces. Galton published this finding in 1878, and also described his composite photography technique in detail in Inquiries in Human Faculty and its Development. He subsequently sold the invention to an early erotic photography firm.
ellauri159.html on line 1329: Were I obliged to give a short name to the attitude in question, I should call it that of radical empiricism, in spite of the fact that such brief nicknames are nowhere more misleading than in philosophy. I say 'empiricism,' because it is contented to regard its most assured conclusions concerning matters of fact as hypotheses liable to modification in the course of future experience; and I say 'radical,' because it treats the doctrine of monism itself as an hypothesis, and, {viii} unlike so much of the half-way empiricism that is current under the name of positivism or agnosticism or scientific naturalism, it does not dogmatically affirm monism as something with which all experience has got to square. The difference between monism and pluralism is perhaps the most pregnant of all the differences in philosophy. Primâ facie the world is a pluralism; as we find it, its unity seems to be that of any collection; and our higher thinking consists chiefly of an effort to redeem it from that first crude form.
ellauri184.html on line 518: The Book of Genesis explains circumcision as a covenant with God given to Abraham,[Gen 17:10] In Judaism it "symbolizes the promise of lineage and fruitfulness of a great (???) nation," the "seal of ownership (???) and the guarantee of relationship between peoples and their god." Some scholars look elsewhere for the origin of Jewish circumcision. One explanation, dating from Herodotus, is that the custom was acquired from the Egyptians, possibly during the period of enslavement. An additional hypothesis, based on linguistic/ethnographic work begun in the 19th century, suggests circumcision was a common tribal custom among Semitic tribes (Jews, Arabs, and Phoenicians).
ellauri185.html on line 392: In 2005, he upset the chair of the SETI: Post-Detection Science and Technology Taskgroup of the International Academy of Astronautics. Davies serves on the Advisory Council of METI (Messaging Extraterrestrial Intelligence). Davies was a co-author with Felisa Wolfe-Simon on the faked 2011 Science article "A Bacterium That Can Grow by Using Arsenic Instead of Phosphorus". Davies has been criticized for promoting a hypothesis that cancer is an evolutionary atavism or throwback to single-celled life, a claim that is biologically unfounded.
ellauri185.html on line 844: Genetic sexual attraction is a concept in which a strong sexual attraction may develop between close blood relatives who first meet as adults. There is no evidence for genetic sexual attraction being an actual phenomenon, and the hypothesis is regarded as pseudoscience.
ellauri269.html on line 550: I think this is the classic case of already having a hypothesis and then trying to find anything remotely relevent to prove that hypothesis rather than the other way around.
ellauri333.html on line 236: The orientalist F. E. Pargiter (1852–1927) theorized that Hanuman was a proto-Dravidian deity. According to this theory, the name "Hanuman" derives from Tamil word for male monkey (ana-mandi), first transformed to "Anumant" – a name which remains in use. "Anumant", according to this hypothesis, was later Sanskritized to "Hanuman" because the ancient Aryans confronted with a popular monkey deity of ancient Dravidians coopted the concept and then Sanskritized it. According to Murray Emeneau, known for his Tamil linguistic studies, this theory does not make sense because the Old Tamil word mandi in Sangam literature can only mean "female monkey", and Hanuman is male. Further, adds Emeneau, the compound ana-mandi makes no semantic sense in Tamil, which has well developed and sophisticated grammar and semantic rules. The "prominent jaw" etymology, according to Emeneau, is therefore plausible.
ellauri336.html on line 310: The Rabbis asked Kimchis what she had done to merit having seven sons serve as Kohein Gadol (High Priest). She responded that the beams of her house never saw her with her hair uncovered. While the Rabbis rejected her hypothesis (because many other women have acted likewise), the extent to which she observed this law is still presented as an example of meritorious behavior (Yoma 47a; see Yerushalmi Megilla 1:10 for the accepted opinion as to the merit of Kimchis);
xxx/ellauri087.html on line 380: Among his major contributions to linguistic theory was the hypothesis that not all langages are like English, which Noam Chomsky found difficult to believe. Hale suggested that certain languages were non-configurational, lacking the phrase structure characteristic of such languages as English. Some people were Indians and aboriginals, and some were Finns with a baby and no place to put it in.
xxx/ellauri123.html on line 1277: Self-reported and physiological sexual arousal to adult and pedophilic stimuli were examined among 80 men drawn from a community sample of volunteers. Over ¼ of the current subjects self-reported pedophilic interest or exhibited penile arousal to pedophilic stimuli that equalled or exceeded arousal to adult stimuli. The hypothesis that arousal to pedophilic stimuli is a function of general sexual arousability factors was supported in that pedophilic and adult heterosexual arousal were positively correlated, particularly in the physiological data. Subjects who were highly arousable, insofar as they were unable to voluntarily and completely inhibit their sexual arousal, were more sexually aroused by all stimuli than were subjects who were able to inhibit their sexual arousal. Thus, arousal to pedophilic stimuli does not necessarily correspond with pedophilic behavior.
xxx/ellauri165.html on line 580:
Yes, the virgin fixation is puzzling. I expect it has something to do with women as property and the importance of verifying lineage. Yes I have a pet theory (hypothesis) that in civilizations where we lived in large numbers and with animals diseases could bounce from people to animals and back again hence all the plagues. In cultures where people were relatively isolated then virginity doesn’t seem to play as big a role. Mind you if you are paying for a wife to raise your children who you see as the primary reason for your existence then not raising someone else’s children may be a prime issue.
xxx/ellauri179.html on line 627: And then, Novick gives himself away. He writes in another footnote that Holmes was someone with whom James “might have been intimate.” “Might have been”? There’s incertitude for you. My surmise is that Novick is trying to support his hypothesis of James’ initial sexual experience, and that he picks the name handiest to him. Why not James’ closer friends, John LaFarge or Thomas Perry? Novick seems to want to link his two subjects. It is clear the homosexuality doesn’t bother him. He simply wants us to know that James was a sexual man and a loving person. Biographers often develop strange attachments to their subjects. (Indeed!)
xxx/ellauri265.html on line 378: A 2003 study found that the frequency of pregnancy from rape is significantly higher than that of pregnancy in non-coercive intercourse, and advanced the hypothesis that male rapists disproportionately target women exhibiting biological indications of fertility. But maybe the rapists are also unusually well motivated and squirt in disproportionately large semen packages?
20