eh. Doesn't seem that glorious. Add a few additional sources of
data and suddenly he could have a sound argument. Methodologies
for inquiry circa 1750s aren't equivalent to methodologies for
inquiry circa 2015. Not scratch. You take the questionable data
and see if it corresponds to a better source of data, and build
from there.
In the end, he could end up with supporting his initial
hypothesis quite well.
Hume's methods were fine for his time I'm sure. Oh it was kind
of fun. The OP based a hypothesis on a TV show - which to me, is
fine, but then drew a conclusion using it as the sole piece of
evidence. People got upset and started calling him all sorts of
names. Exploded when he mentioned Christian. I encouraged him to
search "do women complain more than men?" which in the end,
seemed to be what he was getting at. He was very happy with that
idea, of finding additional evidence. Then, he left. All the
name-callers remain.
