No sane, rational, and sufficiently-educated person puts forward arguments incompatible with science.
The problem with this statement is that it puts 99.999% of everyone ‘beyond the pale’. It disallows meaningful conversations about things which have huge functional impacts on all humans, but about which science has little of use or coherence to say. It cripples conversation about things which our current science deems impossible, without allowing for the certainty that key aspects of what is currently accepted science will be superseded in the future.
In other words, it is an example of a reasonable sounding thing to say that is almost perfectly useless. You have argued yourself into a box.
I would suggest that no sane, rational and sufficiently-educated person ascribes zero probability to irrational seeming propositions.
The problem with this statement is that it puts 99.999% of everyone ‘beyond the pale’. It disallows meaningful conversations about things which have huge functional impacts on all humans, but about which science has little of use or coherence to say. It cripples conversation about things which our current science deems impossible, without allowing for the certainty that key aspects of what is currently accepted science will be superseded in the future.
In other words, it is an example of a reasonable sounding thing to say that is almost perfectly useless. You have argued yourself into a box.
I would suggest that no sane, rational and sufficiently-educated person ascribes zero probability to irrational seeming propositions.