The Enlightenment that produced so many liberal concepts, like liberty & free speech, also ushered in the age of science. A scientist starts with an idea, a hypothesis, that might explain an observable phenomena, then determines an experiment that would test that assumption, and if the results match the prediction, the hypothesis is a proven theory and becomes accepted science. A hypothesis doesn’t use the word “probably:” science is a statement of fact not conjecture. However, if an outcome occurs that goes contrary to the theory, even if it is only a 1-in-1000 event, the hypothesis must be edited to include the aberration and tested again, or it becomes invalid: this is the basis of the old misquoted adage “the exception disproves the rule.”
But debate is not science, and a statement can be assumed true even if there are examples counter to a generalized hypothesis. This distinction is subtle so it’s often exploited to discredit the generalization: an opponent will cite a single exc
