Well, yes, I accept that Phil was blocked by someone and asked to keep away and then that he wrote an email saying that he intends to go & sit in the front row of his classes anyway based on the evidence of him admitting this & posting a photo of the email.https://twitter.com/cheomit/status/970027498242101248 …
-
-
Again, sure. Still sounds like you took quite a bit on testimony before this example; seems inconsistent with disregarding fairly well grounded testimony against Krauss. But not looking to argue. I thought there was inconsistency, curious as to your view. Thanks for responding.
-
No, I responded to this example. That was my first response. To the photo of the email. I do know the history from the other side & much more than I have the right to discuss. I do believe it because it comes from many sources with photos.
-
If it were women who say Krauss assaulted them who had been talking to me separately about this at the time and I knew and trusted them, I'd believe them too. I wouldn't expect anyone else to without evidence tho.
-
Ah, ok, great. This helps. Doesn't that mean you're stuck with only accepting serious claims from people you know well? Seems a problem! Krauss has been excluded from two institutes who would likely love to have him; that carries less weight than having a relationship?
-
Well, yes. I can only say I know things to be true when I have seen evidence of them. I can believe people I know to be trustworthy but I could still be wrong & I cannot expect anyone else to believe them. The institutes might know Krauss to be guilty. This doesn't mean I do.
-
No, I certainly don't know Krauss (or Phil) have done all that's claimed. But we all know knowledge and belief are different. The question is not what we know, but what we're justified in believing is likely. I think we both have evidence for reasonably concluding against both.
-
OK but the examples are not the same. Phil posted the email of himself doing the thing I am criticising him for doing and admitted doing it. If he denied it and said it was made up, this would be different. Krauss denies it and says it is made up.
-
In this case, we'd need to sift the body of evidence and the number of independent accusations and assess for probability beyond reasonable doubt. We just don't have to do that in Phil's case because he admits to doing it & provides the evidence himself.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.