He recalls having told, in a lecture on the 6th of February, Carl Jung's experience of a dead friend appearing at the foot of his bed and leading him to a red-bound book, The Legacy of the Dead, in the man's library.
Date (happened)
6 February 1965
unresolved
6 February 1965
stated · probable · preferred
Told
after 25 February 1964
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 1777 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 1777 surviving (non-refuted) claim: 1964-2-25 at `probable`. All claims on the node: 1965-11-12 refuted; 1962-7-14 refuted; 1964-2-25 probable (preferred). Superseded here: delta 0: 1962-07-14 at `certain` (run `corpus v1 / phase3b`) | delta 1: 1962-07-14 at `probable` (run `v1.1/l4/ceiling/c2`).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.
25 February 1964
estimated
Reasoning
Passage 544010 is carried by node 1777. Although its remaining field_delivery row is typed as a probable after-bound, the structured L7 adjudication is authoritative and concludes from three converging internal lines that the lecture itself was delivered exactly on 1964-02-25 at certain confidence, formally rejecting the 1965 and 1962 alternatives. This supplies the exact told date.
14 July 1962
stated · refuted
Reasoning
|| v1.1/l7/told-close: the delivery claim this was derived from (nid 1777, 1962-7-14) was refuted by the L7 adjudication (#2363). The corrected told claim from the same lecture stands at 1964-2-25. This row is retired rather than deleted so the derivation history remains readable.
14 July 1962
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 1777 and asserts `certain`, but the strongest claim that node carries is `probable`, so there is nothing for `certain` to inherit from. nid 1777 delivery claims: 1965-11-12 possible; 1962-7-14 doubtful; 1964-2-25 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 1777, 1962-7-14) was refuted by the L7 adjudication (#2363). The corrected told claim from the same lecture stands at 1964-2-25. This row is retired rather than deleted so the derivation history remains readable.
Sources
Source
- His Eternal Play ¶7 (On the 6th of February you spoke on a certain subject and you brought in Jung, Carl Jung, and you told an experience of Jung where he was contemplating the death of a friend whose funeral he had attended that day.)