Egg, (can I call you egg? LOL)
Good point. I agree, I think we probably can safely assume that the laws of science are reasonable even if we can't "prove prove" them. But I'm a 'logic' kind of guy, so I like to see if I can "prove prove" things, and I can't prove science deductively. I am very interested in hearing how inductive logic could do this, I've never heard how inductive logic really works.
But Primordial I still think that the blue pen would be irrelevant, let's arrange these statements into a logical argument:
premise I see blue swans or I see black swans (or anything else)
premise I see blue pens
conclusion All swans are blue or All swans are black
Both of these fall under an identified fallacy, for which I can't remember the name. But it's something like 'the conclusion is not supported by the arguments, ergo invalid'.
So anyway, I'd like to hear what you think.
Evan
P.S. Does anyone know the HTML symbol for 'tab'. I can't remember.