Neville describes his orthodox Christian upbringing with Sunday school twice a week and his mother reading and interpreting Scripture as secular history, and how at twenty or twenty-two he was first exposed to this teaching by a friend and could not sleep for the shock of it.
Date (happened)
between 19 February 1925 and 18 February 1928
unresolved
between 19 February 1925 and 18 February 1928
estimated · probable · preferred
Reasoning
Neville gives his age as 'twenty or twenty-two' when first exposed to this teaching. Anchored exactly to his 1905-02-19 birth date, age twenty begins 1925-02-19 and age twenty-two lasts through the day before his 23rd birthday, 1928-02-18. This is a finer (day-bound) version of the existing 1925..1927 (year-only) between claim from the same passage, which undercounted the upper bound by omitting the part of age twenty-two that falls in early 1928.
between 1925 and 1927
stated · probable
Told / reported
14 July 1969
estimated · probable
Why
Lane L7 (#2354) re-derivation. Supersedes in substance, not in storage, the refuted-date told claim(s) on this event; those rows stand per append-only.
Reasoning
Re-derived, not walked down. The existing told claim(s) on this event took their date from a delivery claim on node 1024 that the corpus has since REFUTED, so the corpus was asserting that Neville told this on a day it separately says he did not lecture. That is a contradiction rather than an over-confidence, and lowering the confidence would have hidden it instead of resolving it. The refutation stands and the told claim is the wrong side of it. Node 1024 surviving (non-refuted) claim: 1969-7-14 at `probable`. All claims on the node: 1957-??-?? refuted; 1958-3-17 refuted; 1969-7-14 probable (preferred). Superseded here: delta 0: 1958-03-17 at `certain` (run `corpus v1 / phase3b`) | delta 1: 1958-03-17 at `probable` (run `v1.1/l4/ceiling/c2`). The telling is dated by its lecture, so with the refuted date removed from consideration the surviving claim is what the telling inherits, at that claim own confidence and no higher.
17 March 1958
stated · refuted
Reasoning
|| v1.1/l7/told-close: the delivery claim this was derived from (nid 1024, 1958-3-17) was refuted by the L7 adjudication (#2363). The corrected told claim from the same lecture stands at 1969-7-14. This row is retired rather than deleted so the derivation history remains readable.
17 March 1958
stated · refuted
Why
Corrects the confidence of the told claim written by run `corpus v1 / phase3b` at delta 0 on this event; that claim is left standing per append-only. Ceiling rule #2132.
Reasoning
Confidence only; the date is not re-adjudicated and is left exactly as written. This claim is derived from the delivery claims of node 1024 and asserts `certain`, but the strongest claim that node carries is `probable`, so there is nothing for `certain` to inherit from. nid 1024 delivery claims: 1957-??-?? doubtful; 1958-3-17 doubtful; 1969-7-14 probable. Walked back to `probable`, the ceiling. Whether the DATE is right is a separate question this row does not touch; if the evidence turns out to support more confidence, it will have to come from a source other than this node. || v1.1/l7/told-close: the delivery claim this was derived from (nid 1024, 1958-3-17) was refuted by the L7 adjudication (#2363). The corrected told claim from the same lecture stands at 1969-7-14. This row is retired rather than deleted so the derivation history remains readable.
Sources
Source
- Imagination ¶21 (I was raised in a very wonderful Christian orthodox home, where Sunday school was in order not once a week, but twice a week, grace at the table, Mother reading Scripture to us and interpreting Scripture based upon her concept, which was a secular concep…)