/sci/ - Science & Math

>>12627291
>Now kindly fuck off, you are giving me a headache
>This is so true that trying to explain it gives me a headache
You're just experiencing cognitive dissonance.
Your beliefs you latch on mismatch experience and reality. This is just your brain dealing with void leaps in reasoning.

The maxim you used also does not apply here. With a police investigation, there is a crime committed with a limited set of possibilities. With advocating policy, it is not as simple as that.
Even with crime, investigating does not start with that maxim. A dead body could be manslaughter, suicide, or murder. Each have a method of investigation.
If investigators started with that maxim, then every dead body would end up being investigated as a murder with a definite culprit. You'd be looking for a culprit rather than just looking for evidence.

You can see how that can lead to tons of innocent people being convicted of crimes. Jumping the gun with every investigation of a dead body with the assumption that it is murder is false, and analogously, this is what you're doing with thinking Jews or elitist are secretly plotting to kill whites.
This is also the same situation that led to the Salem witch trials. Rye poisoning, ergotism, was assumed to be the malicious intentional result of witchcraft rather than having a proper investigation. The more dogmatically people wanted to confirm their beliefs, the more schizo shit they saw.

>This old hag lives alone! She has the opportunity, she must be a witch too, so she has the motive because witches are evil!
>This woman makes herbal potions! She must be behind this! She has the means, opportunity, and motive because she is a witch!

This is what we are talking about.