 And we have our four kinds of evidence, logical possibility, frequency, propensity, plausibility, and that's all well and good. Now, I want to be clear, these are not created equal. And these are different kinds of evidence are appropriate for different sorts of situations. Frequency possibility or excuse me, frequency probability is really useful for such things as gambling. And well, I'll say not encouraging gambling, but in terms of just finding out the sheer mathematical possibility in terms of what is available and your favorite outcome is right in there. Okay, cool. That's a logical possibility and that's really, really useful. But it's not going to be useful for other situations, right? I mean, we'll just speak simply and stupidly here in Texas, right? What's possible for the weather? Well, you've got bright sunshine, you've got partly cloudy, you've got overcast, you have rain, heavy rain. I don't know, depending on the time of year, I might want to throw in freezing rain, sleet and snow, right? So we got eight. Well, that doesn't mean that on any given day, there's a one in eight chance for sunshine. There's not a 12.5% chance for sunshine on any given day in Texas. The chances are really, really high. You know, frequency probability is more useful for this. If you're going to consider maybe, you know, the rainfall over the course of the month and that given month. Okay. Well, we'll look at, you know, so we're, you know, for funsies sake, right? We were in February. If we want to determine the chance of rain this month in San Antonio, right, we would look to frequency. Look, how often we have rain during this time of year? If I want to look at the weather on a particular day, okay, I'd probably look at propensity. Well, what are the prevailing conditions? Well, the, you know, today, right, got bright, bright sunshine, humidity is low, pressure is high, but we're not going to have rain today. And I know that through propensity. I'm not looking at how often we have rain on what's today, February 4th, something like that. I'm not going to look at how often we have rain on February 4th. I'm going to look at, well, what's happening today? What are the conditions right here and now? You know, in plausibility is just not sitter for this at all. Okay. I step outside, I feel like it's going to rain today. Well, no, that's not good enough. So these different kinds of evidence are suitable for different sorts of situations. Trying to figure out what's going to happen today in terms of whether propensity is excellent. If we're going to figure out the odds of, I don't know, double sixes coming up when you roll the die, logical possibility is excellent. If we're going to figure out whether trends over the past 10 years and make a forecast on what's going to happen the next year, well, frequency probability is excellent for that. You know, plausibility usually gets the short end of the stick for a lot of folks, but we can't, we can't leave aside plausibility either. Plausibility is going to inform, well, most of our claims to knowledge about, say, morality, knowledge, existence, it's going to be plausibility that's going to tell us what a material object is. Physical scientists don't do that. Physical scientists might investigate further and tell us what a material object is composed of. Okay, but the starting definition for what's even material to begin with, that starts with plausibility. The scientific method is not going to tell us whether the scientific method is a good form of inference. That is also plausibility. We can't use frequency to determine whether the scientific method is a good, well, that's not going to, not logical possibility, right? Well, either it works or doesn't, so it's a 50-50 shift, we won't know that's stupid, right? That's just dumb. So it's going to have to be plausibility that's going to inform actually our abstract notions for a lot of the time. So the different kinds of evidence, they're not all the same. And sometimes just downright inappropriate, he has one kind of evidence for an argument than another, right? That's going to weaken the argument. If we use plausibility for everything, wow, we've weakened a lot. We have to use plausibility for some things, but I can't use plausibility to tell me what the weather's going to be like or how the stock market's going to, what the stock market's going to do today. I can't use plausibility to tell me how, you know, what the chances for gambling, right? I'm sorry, no matter how good you feel about a dice roll, that's not going to determine what the dice roll is going to be. That's not evidence where what the dice roll is going to be. It's going to be something else. So we're talking about the strength of the argument. It's not only available versus absent, not only complete versus incomplete, but whether you're using the right kind of evidence for that particular conclusion, for that topic.