|1 person marked this as a favorite.|
Some rules types read da rules with Aristotelian logic. You have a known, you can proceed from a known by rational logic from that known in perfect, non contradictory order. If evidence doesn't absolutely 100% mean that something is a certain way, it's worthless. If something isn't 100% contradictory, it means absolutely nothing.
Another type is Baysean logic: you can weigh different kinds of evidence against each other, and something can PROBABLY mean that a rule works a certain way without being 100% proof.
Baysean logic can be more than a little subjective, but Aristotelian logic will give you outright contradictory answers depending on what you use as your start point and how you plinko that through a series of if/then to get to your answer. Aristotelian logic requires a perfect system with no exceptions in order to work, and as much as i love the PF rules set, that's not what it is.