Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Lanefan" data-source="post: 8146501" data-attributes="member: 29398">I hear what you're saying here.&nbsp; I've said it, or similar, to myself many times over the years regarding that 80% coming up over and over; and if (as in, when!) I catch myself falling into that 80% rut I actively try to get out of it by trying to come up with different alternatives if-when the same situation arises repeatedly.&quot;Most plausible&quot; isn't the exclusive credibility test; though it's quite reasonable to expect that the most plausible thing is going to happen most of the time it's not going to happen all the time, and nor should it.&nbsp; I don't, however, see much benefit to pushing the percentage of less-plausible outcomes up too high, as in the long run doing so would stretch believability until it snapped.&nbsp; So yes, realistic is a concern.A better exclusive credibility test is &quot;Plausible at all?&quot;; as failing this means the outcome almost certainly won't happen.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Lanefan, post: 8146501, member: 29398"] I hear what you're saying here. I've said it, or similar, to myself many times over the years regarding that 80% coming up over and over; and if (as in, when!) I catch myself falling into that 80% rut I actively try to get out of it by trying to come up with different alternatives if-when the same situation arises repeatedly. "Most plausible" isn't the exclusive credibility test; though it's quite reasonable to expect that the most plausible thing is going to happen most of the time it's not going to happen all the time, and nor should it. I don't, however, see much benefit to pushing the percentage of less-plausible outcomes up too high, as in the long run doing so would stretch believability until it snapped. So yes, realistic is a concern. A better exclusive credibility test is "Plausible at all?"; as failing this means the outcome almost certainly won't happen. [/QUOTE]

Verification